Hi,
On Jun 3, 2007, at 5:16 PM, Mark Townsley wrote:
Timothy J. Salo wrote:
JP Vasseur wrote:
2) New name
Although we called this initiative RSN: Routing for Sensor
Networks, it does apply more generally to constrained nodes (Low
Power)
operating in Lossy Networks. Objects in general would typically
be part of those networks. So from now on, let's rename this work
R2LN: "Routing issues for Low Power, Lossy Networks", and use
that acronym in all IDs.
I suggest that "Routing Issues in Low-Power Wireless Networks"
might be more descriptive.
"Wireless" implies "lossy". "Wireless" also implies a variety
of other behaviors, such as a limited-range broadcast (usually),
and a variety of others.
I doubt that we will spend any time at all thinking about
low power wired networks.
"Low-Power" sounds better than "Resource-Constrained", although
the latter might be more descriptive.
And finally, to do the job well, this group must look at more
than just routing issues (e.g., neighbor discovery and management
in low-power wireless networks). We might consider:
This part should be part of the 6lowpan recharter. The idea amongst
the ADs has been to split off the routing portion of the work on
low-power networks to the routing area, and continue forward with
work on ND, bootstrapping, etc. within the int-area.
Indeed ... By the way this gives the opportunity to re-enforce the
fact that this initiative deals with routing issues *only*.
If we need additional specifications for the routing that do not deal
with pure routing issues, then we need to ask to 6lowpan indeed.
"Internetworking Issues in Low-Power Wireless Networks"
or
"Internetworking Issues in Resource-Constrained Wireless Networks"
or even
"Internetworking Issues in Resource-Constrained Networks" (I2RCN)
One (non-trivial) advantage of "Internetworking" is that it
helps answer the question: Why should the IETF (e.g., rather than
the IEEE) be interested in this work? (Assuming that we think
about how low-power wireless networks should be interconnected
with the Internet.)
Because I think that these devices will soon be part of the
Internet ;-) Quite seriously.
And we need to keep the word Routing here.
I agree that this is an important topic that should be part of both
charters.
Thanks.
JP.
- Mark
-tjs
_______________________________________________
RSN mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn
_______________________________________________
RSN mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
