#121: IESG comment #30 (by the Routing Area Directorate) - Single-criterion Vs.
Multi-criteria routing
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Reporter: carle...@… | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: routing-requirements | Version:
Severity: - | Keywords:
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
- This section defines
. three link evaluation metrics: transmission rate and latency (see R05),
power Tx/Rx (see R02), in addition to link quality associated to physical
impairments, losses, etc. (see R04, and R06)
. two node evaluation metrics: power consumption and transmission range
(which affects connectivity)
Are these metrics expected to be translated into "routing metrics"?
Algorithms for multi-criteria routing experience either excessive
computational complexities or low performance (routing with more than one
criteria is an NP complete problem). Knowing the limited CPU and memory
per node it is not clear what are the "acceptable" trade-offs to comply
with R01 and R10.
Further their composition as network wide evaluation metrics: path
delivery ratio, path quality, path reconfiguration (dependent on the
number of hops) - see R09 results in combinatorial explosion in meshed
/multi-hop networks. Here also tradeoff between computational complexity
(time and resources) and memory size, shall be better balanced against
these "network wide metric" requirements.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/121>
6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/>
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
