Hi Ludwig! > Isn't ccn-lite using the lower layer(s) (MAC, LLC, driver - correct me if > I'm wrong) of the old stack and should be upgraded to use the lower layer(s) > of the new stack? (What about OpenWSN?) Or are those layers not considered > part of the stack?
Yes, you're right, ccn-lite can run directly on top of Link Layer (and
actually more or less any other layer) and should be upgraded.
OpenWSN provides a full network stack from Link to Application Layer.
> >I think we cannot compare to Linux,
> >BSD, and
> >the like here. They can afford to make different modules somehow
> >interoperable
> >at cost of memory, we cannot.
>
> As far as I remember, the modularization of the new stack had exactly this
> as a goal.
Yes, that's correct. However, there will - as Kaspar pointed out - still exist
other stack implementations. Actually, this might be another reason for a
name: if one implements a new module for this stack, one should indicate that
it is compatible to stack XYZ.
Cheers,
Oleg
--
panic("This never returns");
linux-2.6.6/kernel/power/swsusp.c
pgpUF9jUp9uHw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
