[SensorNetArch] Plan

[Cheng Tien Ee]

>I'm not convinced the table is needed at the sp layer since this is
>one instance where the data probably will not be shared amongst
>network protocols.  Different protocols may have different naming
>requirements that are resolved by the network service manager.  They
>can then decide which subset to filter on (and correspondingly call
>the network service manager, not sp)
>  
>
It's not only sharing between protocols, which itself is of importance 
because I can think of network management protocols that may need 
information from all others in the network. It's also about a protocol 
being able to receive packets with different addresses, for instance a 
network protocol may say, "I want to receive broadcasts, address 0x1278 
and 0x9321". In this instance I am thinking that these addresses are in 
TOS_Msg's addr field. In general I think an address can be defined 
across different links, for instance a multicast tree can be built over 
a network with different radio technologies. With such a table the 
protocol can say, "I want to listen for all packets from any interface 
belonging to my mutlicast tree, and they will be addressed to 0x1278". 
Having such a table gives that flexibility. Anyway, this is my 
interpretation of a multiple name per node model.