Re: [core] FW: New Version Notification fordraft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00.txt

"weigengyu" <weigengyu@bupt.edu.cn> Fri, 11 October 2013 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <weigengyu@bupt.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F3E11E8123 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 23:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4aAYLB8Kf9jK for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 23:26:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.bupt.edu.cn (mx1.bupt.edu.cn [211.68.68.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A978911E8131 for <core@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 23:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from WeiGengyuPC (unknown [10.103.241.46]) by mx1.bupt.edu.cn (AnyMacro(G7)) with ESMTPA id BDEDC19F3AE; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:26:41 +0800 (HKT)
Message-ID: <A027140C2AF449828323C6388B0C69B6@WeiGengyuPC>
From: weigengyu <weigengyu@bupt.edu.cn>
To: "Rahman, Akbar" <Akbar.Rahman@InterDigital.com>
References: <D60519DB022FFA48974A25955FFEC08C05529BC9@SAM.InterDigital.com>
In-Reply-To: <D60519DB022FFA48974A25955FFEC08C05529BC9@SAM.InterDigital.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:26:40 +0800
Organization: BUPT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 16.4.3505.912
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V16.4.3505.912
Cc: core@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [core] FW: New Version Notification fordraft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00.txt
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/core>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 06:26:53 -0000

Hi, Rahman,

My answer the question "Should we have a CORE deliverable for CoAP support 
of Sleepy Nodes?" is YES.

But I have some questions about the use cases.
According to "Sleepy Devices using CoAP - Requirements 
draft-dijk-core-sleepy-reqs-00"
the definitin of Sleeping/Asleep as following:
   Sleeping/Asleep  : A SEP being in a "sleeping state" i.e. its network 
interface is disconnected and a SEP is not able to send or receive messages.
So, a sleepy node should not start to communicate with other nodes.  The 
communication between sleepy nodes is not possible, that is given in 
"Problem statement and Use cases of Sleepy node in Constrained node networks 
draft-hong-lwig-sleepynode-problem-statement-00"

When a node is in sleeping state, it can receive, but it cannot send.
The sleeping node can be waken-up by a received message or timer expired 
event; therefore the node turns to be awake.
An alarming message may cause the sleepy node awake and then to give 
response.
The timer expired event may cause  the sleepy node awake and then to send 
heartbeat.
A node can send a message out only when it is awake.

Afterall, it is possible that the non-sleep node  initiates communication 
with a sleepy node. The sleep node is passive.
If the node in sleepy state wants to respond the message, it firstly turns 
to awake state.

regards,

Gengyu


-----原始邮件----- 
From: Rahman, Akbar
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 11:39 AM
To: Carsten Bormann ; core@ietf.org
Subject: [core] FW: New Version Notification 
fordraft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00.txt

Hi Carsten (and WG),


I wrote a short draft based on the following question from IETF-87 (Berlin):

"Should we have a CORE deliverable for CoAP support of Sleepy Nodes?"

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/core/current/msg04750.html



Any and all comments will be much appreciated.



Akbar

-----Original Message-----
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:34 PM
To: Rahman, Akbar; Rahman, Akbar
Subject: New Version Notification 
fordraft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00.txt


A new version of I-D, draft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Akbar Rahman and posted to the IETF 
repository.

Filename: draft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need
Revision: 00
Title: Sleepy Devices: Do we need to Support them in CORE?
Creation date: 2013-10-11
Group: Individual Submission
Number of pages: 6
URL: 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00.txt
Status: 
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need
Htmlized: 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00


Abstract:
   This document summarizes the discussion in the CORE WG related to the
   question of whether support of sleepy devices is required for the
   CoAP protocol, CORE Link Format, CORE Resource Directory, etc.  The
   only goal of this document is to trigger discussions in the CORE WG
   so that all relevant considerations for sleeping devices are taken
   into account.




Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission 
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat

_______________________________________________
core mailing list
core@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core