[net2-wg] dhv release timeline

[dangtx at pdx.edu]

Quoting Omprakash Gnawali <gnawali at usc.edu>:

> 2009/8/23 Razvan Musaloiu-E. <razvanm at cs.jhu.edu>:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2009, dangtx at pdx.edu wrote:
>>
>>> There one assumption that DIP doesn't explicitly assume that is  
>>> all the nodes have the same number of keys. DHV requires that  
>>> assumption in order to work. However, both DIP and DHV don't yet  
>>> explicitly address the case where nodes have different number of  
>>> keys/programs, which can be part of the heterogeneity umbrella.
>>
>> I think the assumption that all the nodes have the same keys is  
>> reasonable. All the nodes need to participate in dissemination of  
>> all the keys anyway. If the nodes only propagate the keys they care  
>> about then some updates might never reach some nodes.
>
> Are there any disadvantages of dhv relative to dip? Code size? memory?
>

dhv uses slightly less codesize, ram and rom compared to dip (refer to  
the report for detail).

Theoretically, When the number of items is very large (about 10000  
items and 8 new keys), the log behavior of dip might become better  
than dhv. However, I would argue that 10000 items is impractical for  
current sensor networks.


> - om_p
>
>