Re: [homenet] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Steven Barth <[e-mail]>]

Hello Benoit,

On 21.10.2015 16:12, Benoit Claise wrote:
> Trying to answer the question "when not to use DNCP?", do I > understand correctly that there is only one limitation: the 64kB >
size Except that, DNCP is generically applicable. Really?

No, that is not true. The applicability section also mentions e.g.:

1. "each node needs to be able to store the entirety of the data
published by all nodes"

2. "As the [...] frequency of data changes per node increases [...]
the benefit of using DNCP diminishes."

3. "If the TLV set published by a node is very large, and has
frequent small changes, DNCP as currently specified in this
specification may be unsuitable as it lacks a delta synchronization
scheme to keep implementation simple."

I'm not sure what other points could be added, however it intentionally
is designed as a generic TLV-sharing protocol so its potential applicability
is broad.

Could you please provide some guidance on other factors we should
evaluate in the Applicability section? We are currently feeling a bit lost
on how we should address your concerns.



Thanks,

Steven