Subject: [Roll] Some thoughts on the requirements documents

From: Jukka MJ Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:05:13 +0300

Hi

I went through the various requirements documents and I'm a bit puzzled. 
In general the drafts are easy to read and we have many interesting 
scenarios described that open up nicely the environment. Yet, the drafts 
list similar requirements, there is very little difference in what they 
expect the routing service to do.

If we are to work on a solution later on, it is somewhat challenging to 
find out the what our goals truly are.

IMHO, the requirements documents should focus on the scenarios and use 
cases of sensor networks, and list in general what the routing subsystem 
aught to do. These drafts should not use RFC 2119 language.

We need a separate document that lists the concrete goals of such a 
routing subsystem/protocol/architecture/service/whateveryouwanttocallit. 
Here there is also a clear need to separate functional and performance 
requirements. Typically performance values and goals are mutually 
exclusive, e.g., we can't have low power and high performance at the 
same time (with some definition of what is low and what is high).

This latter document is used in both analysing the existing schemes and 
drafting a potential solution. I would expect that we end up with one 
general solution, where the parameters can be tuned to certain direction 
to make it fit different use cases.

Actually, we also need to document the threats we see in the 
environment, and focus on the routing subsystem. The current drafts have 
some thoughts about that, but its only a beginning.

Regards,
Jukka
_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll