IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [coman] Device Classes?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 04 April 2014 07:24 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7411A00FD for <coman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 00:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r4_WJlD35Tj3 for <coman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 00:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96F6A1A0019 for <coman@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 00:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s347OTvU011811; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 09:24:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [134.102.116.173] (unknown [134.102.116.173]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C135FA26; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 09:24:28 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <533BBFB7.2000100@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 09:24:27 +0200
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 418289067.161595-bff6f4929a91806148159107d3fab348
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <893C4FAC-437D-4140-9832-A9ABA2D1518A@tzi.org>
References: <533BBFB7.2000100@gmx.net>
To: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/coman/idgF1MVFrdCVj945xQisXGP8_9E
Cc: "coman@ietf.org" <coman@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [coman] Device Classes?
X-BeenThere: coman@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Management of Constrained Networks and Devices <coman.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/coman>, <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/coman/>
List-Post: <mailto:coman@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/coman>, <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 07:24:44 -0000

On 02 Apr 2014, at 09:43, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:

> IMHO these classes are about end devices rather than constrained routers
> and switches.

Actually, the device classes are about nodes in general (hosts and routers).  The document then goes on to say:

   (An alternative name, when the properties as a network node are not
   in focus, is "constrained device”.)

Protocols such as RPL take great care to enable the use of class-1 devices as routers (non-storing mode).
Constrained management will need to match that.

A more important dichotomy than host vs. router may be monitoring vs. configuration.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email