[SensorNetArch] Global Congestion Definition

[Philip Levis]

On Nov 28, 2004, at 9:38 PM, Joe Polastre wrote:

> I'm not sure that S-MAC or TRAMA are applicable for what we want to 
> do.  The
> idea is if you have some configurable set of parameters in SP, in other
> words B-MAC plus some of the S-MAC primitives but in a configurable 
> manner,
> then FPS could use SP, perhaps transparently, to achieve efficient
> end-to-end transfer.  S-MAC and TRAMA, as published, are (IMHO)
> inappropriate for sensor nets due to their lack of control.  The B-MAC 
> paper
> pointed out that S-MAC could do significantly better by allowing a 
> little
> bit of control from higher layer protocols.  In turn, S-MAC and TRAMA 
> as is
> are not appropriate, but a version of them that interacts well with the
> control and configuration ideas of B-MAC and SP may be appropriate.
>
> Does that make sense?

Overall, I agree. However, I'm a stickler and would argue that S-MAC 
and TRAMA are perfectly reasonable approaches, and appropriate for 
sensor networks. Their lack of flexibility and generality, however, 
makes them inappropriate for a sensor network architecture, which has 
to encompass a much broader scope. Application-specificity vs. 
application generality, object vs. class, etc.

Phil

-------

"We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time."

- T. S. Eliot,  'Little Gidding'