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 > >
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 JP Vasseur (jvasseur)
- [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 JP Vasseur (jvasseur)
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 JP Vasseur (jvasseur)
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] Comments For ROLL terminology-06 JP Vasseur (jvasseur)