Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Sun, 05 August 2012 09:01 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0988921F851E for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Aug 2012 02:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.185
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.185 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.187, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_27=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 hXDWf5EibLaJ for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Aug 2012 02:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D0B121F84FC for <roll@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Aug 2012 02:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo14 with SMTP id fo14so2168752vcb.31 for <roll@ietf.org>; Sun, 05 Aug 2012 02:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KHr9dxWJjOqmW1qWM8PXlVil8dm5Xd8tjdgVdmWJrNM=; b=PFQOMb8lizansy7+sYBpOcUqDVL+tDB9olQy9byr4zqEJvbk5KBc6s6iR1QtB0w7a+ wKlJluQTnqxhD6rIEkVPhPykBxsi5m7wvXZCiI4tZ4WrkGLQg0KkWM5banZ/jKIZngig NuA2s06KW1+WBQe842a48mQ4QqLVq3LhY+WZ5IENVgSm5h8bixQiubRE8MMAhOd7eFm9 Gg7kB3KUyr0wGVwjt6LD+erUNcOkZdaLHe5FEM+e1SuYsvFkk+JQNWCsifBUzih8dMlV 6niKQ4dzDwMKQcggw/fBV6kiNK/nZmj8069bQpaWDJ8GKeHITuwN2OWefk9pLQyHXtaV S+ow==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.98.3 with SMTP id ee3mr4777357vdb.127.1344157276161; Sun, 05 Aug 2012 02:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.141.200 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Aug 2012 02:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <772EDA77-FCFD-4403-9C13-3EDA8C89C354@cisco.com>
References: <CADnDZ8_kjUidiPu-ZwGDoFdVdACPRYUGwrFg-euxnBb5WP7tuQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADnDZ8_d5aSdUXqwWkJG_FqzUJ5xxK_o_j5YDxhaSbgTQV9C4g@mail.gmail.com> <772EDA77-FCFD-4403-9C13-3EDA8C89C354@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2012 10:01:16 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnDZ88-3rWN1BsbbNBCb8VkfHZ72rgfoadn+hk4HCegPyCjTg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: "JP Vasseur (jvasseur)" <jvasseur@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf307f34b0f7c67a04c681005f"
Cc: roll <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2012 09:01:19 -0000

Hi JP,

thanks, I agree and looking forward for new draft, but I think defining LLN
is important so other WGs in IETF understand what is LLNs, I already asked
the question to one WG and many have different definiotions. While the
future internet will see a big grow/use in LLNs, it will be useful to
define LLNs and in the end RPL is routing over LLNs.

Another point, which I think very important, in the meeting one input
comment was surprised that ROLL WG had a presentation with using
devices scenario of 1 W transmission power. Which still means some don't
define "Low Power" in the same way, I will write my opinion on this in a
separate thread, however, I suggest to define *Low Power* in the ROLL
terminology draft, because LowPower is first/one important character of LLN
and Lossy is the other.

Regards
AB
============
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 2:55 PM, JP Vasseur (jvasseur) <jvasseur@cisco.com>wrote:

> A new version of the document will be posted, thanks for the comments!
> Just note that some of these terms are not
> related to RPL but to LLNs in general though.
> Thanks.
>
> JP.
>
> On Aug 3, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>
> > Hi JP and All,
> >
> > I need your comments/feedback on the below, and want to know if there
> > will be update to the expired document.
> >
> > Regards
> > AB
> >
> > On 7/5/12, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Vasseur, and All,
> >>
> >> Comments:
> >> +++++++++
> >>
> >> AB>general comment> ROLL is about routers/nodes/hosts Why not defined
> >> :  Host, Node, Link, Interface
> >>
> >> In the body of draft-06:-
> >>
> >> Closed Loop Control: A process whereby a device controller controls
> >> an actuator based on information sensed by one or more field devices.
> >>
> >> AB>suggest> replace [process] with [procedure]
> >> AB>suggest> replace [information] with [input information]
> >>
> >> Downstream: Data direction traveling from outside of the LLN (e.g.
> >> traffic coming from a LAN, WAN or the Internet) via a LBR.
> >>
> >> AB> suggest> remove the example, because first, ROLL is inside LLN not
> >> outside, and second, most of the data-traffic MAY go from the LLN to
> >> the Internet/LBR. IMHO downstream is in the direction of the havier
> >> unit-flow.
> >>
> >> AB> please note that if we use word [data] is different than
> >> [message]. While using [message] we may mean all traffic includes data
> >> and control messages, so the use of downstream and upstream as in
> >> draft-06 will be ok, but if we mention data-direction IMHO the use
> >> downstream-upstream will be the other way around.
> >>
> >> AB> suggest> replace [data] with [message]
> >>
> >> Field Device:
> >>
> >> AB> delete word> field
> >>
> >> MP2P: Multipoint-to-Point is used to describe a particular traffic
> >> pattern (e.g. MP2P flows collecting information from many nodes
> >> flowing inwards towards a collecting sink or an LBR).
> >>
> >> AB>opinion> MP2P is not a traffic pattern it is a transmission method
> >>
> >> I am not sure if the draft covers all terms used in ROLL protocols, I
> >> will check and post on the same thread after. Thanking you,
> >>
> >> Best Regards
> >>
> >> Abdussalam Baryun
> >> University of glamorgan, UK
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> I may be wrong, or may be right, but it does not matter if we work
> together
> >> as a group to discuss and resolve all issues. WGs are always right.
> >>
> *****************************************************************************
> >> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> recipient
> >> and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please
> >> delete it from your system and notify the sender. The contents are
> comply
> >> to the IETF regulations, and WG procedures. You should not copy the
> >> email nor use it for any other purpose, nor disclose, nor distribute its
> >> contents to any other person.
> >>
> *****************************************************************************
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Roll mailing list
> > Roll@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>
>