IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [RSN] Sleepy routers

JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com> Sat, 08 December 2007 16:30 UTC

Return-path: <rsn-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J12Zj-0005jS-OE; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:30:47 -0500
Received: from rsn by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1J12Zi-0005jL-9D for rsn-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:30:46 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J12Zh-0005jD-UP for rsn@ietf.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:30:45 -0500
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J12Zh-0003po-HL for rsn@ietf.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:30:45 -0500
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2007 11:30:45 -0500
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id lB8GUj2I021107; Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:30:45 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id lB8GUia8002625; Sat, 8 Dec 2007 16:30:44 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:30:44 -0500
Received: from 10.86.104.181 ([10.86.104.181]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 8 Dec 2007 16:30:44 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:30:38 -0500
Subject: Re: [RSN] Sleepy routers
From: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>
To: Kris Pister <pister@eecs.berkeley.edu>, Ian Chakeres <ian.chakeres@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C38030DE.1B962%jvasseur@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [RSN] Sleepy routers
Thread-Index: Acg5t6pb6PXS6aWqEdyHSAANk8WjQA==
In-Reply-To: <47599DF7.1040404@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Dec 2007 16:30:44.0866 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE737620:01C839B7]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2322; t=1197131445; x=1197995445; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20<jvasseur@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[RSN]=20Sleepy=20routers |Sender:=20 |To:=20Kris=20Pister=20<pister@eecs.berkeley.edu>,=0A=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20Ian=20Chakeres=20<ian.chakeres@gmail.com>; bh=bE7JC00VX51gSqeL0G60nhVyj41+N5eyVxbWx0Z8kvE=; b=InASeFxvLawjiJgl5WOxJu4VCXe+YdcnKqAloPX3bCD3fpQDo71w8J5z8r BvkfQ1AZjT2bn306p/9LSy0kGAcMFhRije+vt7+RuktxTjSZi4UBtqVFGrPW Z5Su5AVbBx;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15
Cc: rsn@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: rsn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Sensor Networks <rsn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn>, <mailto:rsn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/rsn>
List-Post: <mailto:rsn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rsn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn>, <mailto:rsn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: rsn-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

Nodes in L2Ns could be on sleep indeed. That being said (although certainly
interesting), we would not work on networks comprising sleepy nodes that are
non low power, interconnected with non lossy links (this is a DTN issue).

Thanks.

JP.


> From: Kris Pister <pister@eecs.berkeley.edu>
> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2007 11:24:39 -0800
> To: Ian Chakeres <ian.chakeres@gmail.com>
> Cc: <rsn@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [RSN] Sleepy routers
> 
> I don't know if we need to address it directly, but I think that one of
> the really interesting questions is how to route over (one or more) L2s
> that have at least three orders of magnitude *configurable* tradeoff
> between two parameters of interest: data rate and lifetime.
> There are WSN protocols in use today which can be configured to operate
> anywhere from 100% duty cycle down to well under 0.1%, on a link-by-link
> basis.
> The simplest approach is to route with what is currently configured, and
> push the responsibility for configuration changes elsewhere.  Perhaps
> there are existing protocols that do this?  It seems like some of the
> existing traffic engineering work might be relevant.
> For example, I may know due to ND that I can talk directly to the final
> destination, but currently have no bandwidth configured (or not already
> spoken for) to do so.  Where does the tradeoff between QoS, user
> preferences for node lifetime, routing, and L2 duty cycle configuration
> happen?
> 
> I don't know how much, if any, of this fits in the scope of RoLL.  In
> any case, it is interesting to study.
> 
> ksjp
> 
> Ian Chakeres wrote:
>>> From the proposed charter and name of the group I know that low-power
>> and lossy are two important components. I was wondering whether these
>> routers sleeping most (95%+) of the time should also be elevated to
>> this status.
>> 
>> What do you think? Is the fact that routers are sleeping a lot one of
>> the core issues that needs to be solved in this WG?
>> 
>> Ian
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> RSN mailing list
>> RSN@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn
>>   
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RSN mailing list
> RSN@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn


_______________________________________________
RSN mailing list
RSN@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email