IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lwip] lwig-terminology-02, now with power terminology

"Cao Zhen \(CZ\)" <caozhen@chinamobile.com> Sun, 31 March 2013 08:00 UTC

Return-Path: <caozhen@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: lwip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lwip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D19A21F8511 for <lwip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.377
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RELAY_IS_221=2.222]
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 h9c7AvhgG4+2 for <lwip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:00:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmccmta.chinamobile.com (cmccmta.chinamobile.com [221.176.64.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1C43D21F860B for <lwip@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.20.11]) by rmmx-oa_allagent02-12002 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee25157ecf5f7d-6ff7d; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:59:50 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee25157ecf5f7d-6ff7d
Received: from cmccPC (unknown[172.16.20.82]) by rmsmtp-oa_rmapp01-12001 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee15157ecf3032-c4041; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:59:50 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee15157ecf3032-c4041
From: "Cao Zhen (CZ)" <caozhen@chinamobile.com>
To: 'Carsten Bormann' <cabo@tzi.org>, lwip@ietf.org
References: <20130328163903.7794.26957.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F696C606-2278-49FF-9F7B-7BE75A1E73C6@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <F696C606-2278-49FF-9F7B-7BE75A1E73C6@tzi.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:00:13 +0800
Message-ID: <002f01ce2de5$c6547eb0$52fd7c10$@chinamobile.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIMFP27jVD3/HKMPvXgB/pJU4vU9QHzrqUdmDQBX8A=
Content-Language: zh-cn
Subject: Re: [Lwip] lwig-terminology-02, now with power terminology
X-BeenThere: lwip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Lightweight IP stack <lwip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lwip>, <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lwip>
List-Post: <mailto:lwip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip>, <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:00:41 -0000

Hi Carsten, 

Personally I believe the power efficiency section is good enough for the
terminology, and this is a good basis for future discussions. 

To All, please review and express your opinions. Thanks in advance. 

Best regards,
zhen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lwip-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lwip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Carsten Bormann
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 12:48 AM
> To: lwip@ietf.org
> Subject: [Lwip] lwig-terminology-02, now with power terminology
> 
> As we discussed in Orlando, a small design team charged ahead and wrote
down some power
> terminology, creating a new section 4 in the terminology draft.  Thanks
Ari, Dominique, Peter.
> And thanks Jari for letting us borrow some text out of lwig-cellular.
> 
> Please have a look:
> 
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lwig-terminology-02
> 
> In Orlando, we said we wanted to time-box this into March, so:
> 
> -- Is this the section that we wanted?
> -- Does this need major surgery, or can we do a couple small fixes and
then go for WGLC?
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lwip mailing list
> Lwip@ietf.org
> https://w

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email