Hi Zhen, (Sorry for the long response delay...)
Please find below some inline responses: > Hi Folks, > > As an editor of this document, I go through the document again, and > have the following comments. > > Generally, this document is useful and interesting, and has been > confirmed on several f2f meeting. Thank the contributors for the > work. > > However, I believe there is still space for improvement. Shamed as an > editor though, I will polish the text with my best. > >>Section.1 > In many scenarios, the network systems comprise many battery-powered > or energy-harvesting devices. For example, in an environmental > monitoring system or a temperature and humidity monitoring system in > a data center, there are no always-on and handy sustained power > supplies for the potentially large number of constrained devices. In > such deployment environments, it is necessary to optimize the energy > consumption of the entire system, including computing, application > layer behavior, and lower layer communication. > > > Comments: This paragraph needs some improvement for clarity. Here is a proposed NEW paragraph (which btw changes a bit the approach): The Internet of Things comprises constrained devices, such as sensor and/or actuator nodes, that enable efficient operation and improved user experience in a wide range of application domains, including smart cities, home automation, e-health, etc. In many deployments, these devices must rely on limited energy sources such as batteries or energy- harvesting techniques. This model for powering the devices may be the only choice in hardly accessible locations, while in general it enables reduced-cost and flexible device installation. However, operating on a limited energy source poses significant challenges which require to find a suitable balance between energy consumption and other performance parameters. Typically, communication is the most energy-consuming function in the aforementioned devices. Would you agree with this new text? >>3.3. Throughput > > Although throughput is not typically a key concern in constrained > node network applications, it is indeed important in some services in > this kind of networks, such as over-the-air software updates or when > off-line sensors accumulate measurements that have to be quickly > transferred when there is a connectivity opportunity. > > > Comments: this sounds not useful text. Readers are expected to know > how to improve the throughput while keeping the devices energy > efficient. I see your point. I think that deleting the paragraph would not damage the subsection. The reason why I introduced it some time ago is that 'throughput' is not a typical performance parameter in many constrained networks, therefore I added some motivation about why this was something to take into consideration. To sum up, I don't have a strong opinion about this... Do you still feel the paragraph should be deleted? > >>7 Summary. > This section is very useful in understanding this document. > I do not see a summary of Section. 5, which is an important technique > part of this document. Item 'b' in this section focuses on the protocols developed by the IETF in this space. However, it does not highlight any specific layer. If you think that summarizing section 5 (routing) is important, then we might also need to do the same with the other layers/sections. My personal opinion is that it would be better to just keep it as it is to minimize redundancy in the document. What do you think? Thanks! Best regards, Carles > Best regards > Zhen > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Zhen Cao <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Everyone, >> >> We discussed the draft-ietf-lwig-energy-efficient in Prague meeting >> ,and the consensus was to proceed to WGLC. >> >> This email starts the WGLC for draft-ietf-lwig-energy-efficient. >> Please express your opinion before next Friday, i.e., Oct. 23, 2015. >> >> Many thanks, >> Zhen > > _______________________________________________ > Lwip mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip > _______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
