Pascal; I agree with your change, but I wonder why we need to consider only IoT routers? Shouldn’t we removed the IoT constraint?
Pat Pat Kinney Kinney Consulting LLC IEEE 802.15 WG vice chair, SC chair ISA100 co-chair, ISA100.20 chair O: +1.847.960.3715 [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> On 9, Oct2015, at 10:48, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> wrote: Dear all: Following up on the comments at the interim, My suggestion is to update item 3 as follows: 3. Produce an “On-the-fly" (OTF) specification to enable a distributed dynamic scheduling of time slots with the capability for IoT routers to appropriate chunks of the matrix without starving, or interfering with, other 6TiSCH nodes. This particular work will focus on IP traffic since the work on tracks is not yet advanced enough to specify their requirements for OTF operations. I remove the ‘for IP traffic’ within the main text to indicate that the initial focus is N IP traffic but I hope that now it is more clear that future work on tracks is not precluded. Does that address the comment? Cheers, Pascal _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
