On 6/19/06 8:49 AM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Back after a weekend trip w/o internet access ...
>
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 12:28 AM, David Lapsley wrote:
>> I agree. This has been a really great discussion and has really
>> helped to
>> improve clarity and smooth some wrinkles
Back after a weekend trip w/o internet access ...
On Jun 16, 2006, at 12:28 AM, David Lapsley wrote:
I agree. This has been a really great discussion and has really
helped to
improve clarity and smooth some wrinkles in the document, but we
should
probably bring this phase to a close and star
OK, I'll bite. How does data get into or out of something with zero
external ports? Via internal ports? So, e.g., a source could be
made internal-only, and connect internally to other m-blocks, and
eventually drop to an internal-only sink?
Yes. Or it may not have anything to do with "signal
On 6/15/06 7:06 PM, "Eric Blossom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 02:37:54PM -0500, Michael Dickens wrote:
>> On Thursday, June 15, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Eric Blossom wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:37:48AM -0400, Michael Dickens wrote:
> My theory on this document
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 02:37:54PM -0500, Michael Dickens wrote:
> On Thursday, June 15, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Eric Blossom wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:37:48AM -0400, Michael Dickens wrote:
> >>
> >>Hmmm ... good point. In a dynamic system, ports could get dropped or
> >>connected "on the fl
On Thursday, June 15, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Eric Blossom wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:37:48AM -0400, Michael Dickens wrote:
Hmmm ... good point. In a dynamic system, ports could get dropped or
connected "on the fly". Could you write a quick blurp about this,
somewhere before 4.9? Maybe 4.6
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:37:48AM -0400, Michael Dickens wrote:
>
> Hmmm ... good point. In a dynamic system, ports could get dropped or
> connected "on the fly". Could you write a quick blurp about this,
> somewhere before 4.9? Maybe 4.6.8 or 4.8.6?
>
I think we're approaching the "poli
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:13:52AM -0400, Michael Dickens wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2006, at 2:03 AM, Eric Blossom wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:51:05AM -0400, David Lapsley wrote:
> >>On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>>p68, 4.8.1; and p74, 4.8.4: How ca
On 6/15/06 8:37 AM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2006, at 12:51 AM, David Lapsley wrote:
>> On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Also, the whole discussion of packet radio requirements doesn't
>>> really fit into the GR baseline, and sho
On 6/15/06 2:03 AM, "Eric Blossom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:51:05AM -0400, David Lapsley wrote:
>> On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> p68, 4.8.1; and p74, 4.8.4: How can an m-block have zero ports? I
>>> thought that all data /
On Jun 15, 2006, at 12:51 AM, David Lapsley wrote:
On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, the whole discussion of packet radio requirements doesn't
really fit into the GR baseline, and should instead probably be in
4.3, or at least elsewhere.
Do you mean 4.5.2?
On Jun 15, 2006, at 2:03 AM, Eric Blossom wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:51:05AM -0400, David Lapsley wrote:
On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
p68, 4.8.1; and p74, 4.8.4: How can an m-block have zero ports? I
thought that all data / metadata / signals / wha
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:51:05AM -0400, David Lapsley wrote:
> On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > p68, 4.8.1; and p74, 4.8.4: How can an m-block have zero ports? I
> > thought that all data / metadata / signals / whatever were
> > transported via these ports
On 6/14/06 2:24 PM, "Michael Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave - Working on v3 of this document. There are some changes from
> the previous version which greatly improve clarity! Thanks! Here
> are some more suggestions, comments, questions, and thoughts. - MLD
Michael,
No problems.
Dave - Working on v3 of this document. There are some changes from
the previous version which greatly improve clarity! Thanks! Here
are some more suggestions, comments, questions, and thoughts. - MLD
p60, 4.2: "The Media Access Control (MAC) layer needs low-latency
transmission control -
15 matches
Mail list logo
