On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 06:33:20AM +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > The classes have been defined the way they are because they mirror a > step function in capabilities. > (They also haven been defined on approximate orders of magnitude > because you can't nail these steps down to a kilobyte.) > > What do you think is missing? >
Hijacking the thread, I do actually think we should have some more classes. For coman, in the use cases also devices included that have the memory to run embedded linux. I think we would do well to cover devices such xports or even raspberrys. Yes, those boxes probably are not the target of lwig but they will exist in the internet of things and some of them will exhibit properties (like mostly sleeping) that coman I think needs to address. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
