Re: [Roll] [6tsch] comments on draft-phinney-roll-rpl-industrial-applicability

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Phinney <[e-mail]> writes:
    Tom>    Apologies to those who receive this e-mail on more than one
    Tom> list.  First, the traditional industry differentiation between
    Tom> "factory automation" and "process control" is that factory
    Tom> automation is focused on discrete manufacturing steps (and thus
    Tom> is often referred to as "discrete parts manufacturing") while
    Tom> process control involves continuous processing of fluids and
    Tom> quasi-fluids (e.g., sand, cereal and other materials whose flow
    Tom> rate can be measured by a mass flowmeter).  Many real-world
    Tom> plants use hybrids of these two manufacturing styles.  

So, given that many plants are hybrids, are you saying that this
document applies only to the process control parts of the plant?

Or that hybrid plants are also out of scope?

If there are scope constraints, what exactly are they? 

What happens in a hydrid plant might be significantly more complicated,
as it involves two kinds of networks; if there is a desire to have the
different pieces interconnected.

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [ 
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [ 
]     [e-mail]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [