[SensorNetArch] Two idea for today

[Philip Levis]

On Mar 7, 2005, at 4:17 PM, Gilman Tolle wrote:

> Because this is such a popular idea (I've worked on it also), the
> question then becomes "why aren't we using it?".
>
> Establishing the names is easy -- just build a tree and set up the
> numbering. Adaptation is hard. Responding to the fact that changing a
> parent requires renaming all descendants, and changing the number of
> bits used to represent children requires renaming all children's
> descendents.
>

While adaptation can cause a node's name to change, it might not need 
to be aware of this, as its name is in relation to another. E.g., 
imagine this trivial network:

  A -> B -> C
01   10   01

Where A has root name 01, B has child name 10 and C has child name 01.

All C needs to know is that it is a child of B and its name is 01. If B 
changes its parent (say, to D), then C does not need to know this. When 
does C need to know its network-wide name? All routing/naming decisions 
are resolved locally... generating a node's fully name is just storing 
the route taken up the tree.

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'