Hi Pascal,

Your suggestion looks good to me.

Thanks,
Chonggang

-----Original Message-----
From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:16 AM
To: Wang, Chonggang <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Call for adoption for draft-wang-6tisch-6top-protocol-00

Thanks a bunch, ChongGang:

As you point out, the architecture fails to indicate that the L3 link 
abstraction is really implemented as a pair of bundles.
I'd suggest we change to:

"
                                                                                
With 6TiSCH, the link
  abstraction is implemented as a pair of bundles of cells, on in each
  direction; the size of a bundle is optimal when both the energy
  wasted idle listening and the packet drops due to congestion loss are
  minimized.
"

Is this better?

Pascal


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wang, Chonggang [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: jeudi 21 avril 2016 23:15
> To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Call for adoption for draft-wang-6tisch-6top-protocol-00
>
> Hi Pascal and All,
>
> I have read this I-D. I support to adopt it as the working group draft
> if it addresses the following comment:
>
> ~~~ Beginning of Comment ~~~
> In 6TiSCH architecture and terminology working group documents, the
> concept of ?Bundle? has been proposed to represent a link between nodes.
>
> For example, in the architecture I-D: ?With 6TiSCH, the link
> abstraction is implemented as a bundle of cells; the size of a bundle
> is optimal when both the energy wasted idle listening and the packet
> drops due to congestion loss are minimized.  This can be maintained if
> the number of cells in a bundle is adapted dynamically, and with
> enough reactivity, to match the variations of best-effort traffic.?
>
> In the terminology I-D: ?A bundle represents a half-duplex link
> between nodes, one  transmitter and one or more receivers, with a
> bandwidth that amount to the sum of the cells in the bundle.  A bundle
> is globally identified by (source MAC, destination MAC, TrackID).  At
> Layer 3 a pair of bundles forms a link.  By usining a well-known
> constant, NULLT, as TrackId for a L3 link, the IP link between adjacent nodes 
> A and B comprises 2 bundles:
> (macA, macB, NULLT) and (macB, macA, NULLT).?
>
> Therefore, since 6top I-D aims to enable distributed scheduling, I
> suggest that the 6top protocol should support ?Bundle? as defined in
> the architecture and terminology I-Ds; For example, to contain the
> bundle information in 6P messages in Section 4.2.
> ~~~ End of Comment ~~~
>
>
>
> [cid:[email protected]]
> Chonggang Wang * Member Technical Staff * InterDigital Communications,
> Inc.
> 1001 E. Hector Street, Suite 300, Conshohocken, PA, 19428 * T: +1
> 610.878.5731 * [email protected] *
> www.InterDigital.com<http://www.interdigital.com>
>
>
> This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
> to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
> privileged, confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure to
> anyone other than its intended recipient. Unintended transmission
> shall not constitute waiver of any privilege or confidentiality
> obligation. If you received this communication in error, please do not
> review, copy or distribute it, notify me immediately by email, and
> delete the original message and any attachments. Unless expressly
> stated in this e-mail, nothing in this message or any attachment should be 
> construed as a digital or electronic signature.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 6tisch [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pascal
> Thubert
> (pthubert)
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 12:20 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [6tisch] Call for adoption for
> draft-wang-6tisch-6top-protocol-00
>
> Dear All:
>
> Following up on the rough consensus at the 6TiSCH WG meeting at IETF 95:
> This is a call for adoption of draft-wang-6tisch-6top-protocol-00
> which details the 6P protocol and proposes a solution for a chartered item.
> Please respond by Friday to this mail indicating whether you agree or
> not with this adoption, and preferably provide some rationale to
> support your position.
> The chairs will evaluate the consensus at the interim, and decide
> whether the adoption is confirmed or the call needs to be prolonged.
>
> Thanks un advance!
>
> The chairs,
>
> 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

Reply via email to