Re: [Roll] "Node energy" as a metric for MRHOF

On Jun 2, 2012, at 10:22 AM 6/2/12, JP Vasseur wrote:

> Thanks Ralph. When you say "path cost based on node energy", you refer to using a cumulative metric where node metric are inversely 
> proportional to the remaining energy ? I am asking since there are several approaches to compute the metric, it could be coupled with 
> the remaining energy used as a constraint, …
> Thanks.

JP - I'm trying to relate the path cost computation in MRHOF using "node energy" as the selected metric.  I infer from section 3 and table 1 that node energy is OK to use as the selected metric for MRHOF.  I don't see how simply adding node energy, defined as "estimated percentage of remaining battery capacity" [RFC 6551], is viable as a metric for MRHOF.  If it is viable, I think the way in which it is used to compute path cost and rank needs to be explained in more detail.

- Ralph

> 
> JP.
> 
> On Jun 1, 2012, at 9:53 PM, Ralph Droms wrote:
> 
>> I came across a new puzzle while re-reading draft-ietf-roll-minrank-hysteresis-of.
>> 
>> "Node energy" doesn't appear to be listed as an additive metric in RFC 6551.  Reading the description of the node energy metric, which carries remaining battery capacity as a percentage of initial capacity, I have no clue how a node using MRHOF would compute a path cost based on node energy.  Does node energy really fit as one of the metrics that MRHOF can use?
>> 
>> - Ralph
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> Roll@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> 