Hello Mohit, authors, I've only become aware of this through the WGA call, and am no regular, but here goes:
On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 07:46:15AM +0300, Mohit Sethi wrote: > 1. Do you think this draft should be an LWIG working group Item? yes -- it's not a big change that's necessary, but the way the term IoT has been used in recent years it'd good to have to have the added classes. I also fined the time terminology valuable. > 2. Would you contribute by reviewing this document? Yes, see below. > 3. Would you contribute text to this document? Likely not, but it may happen. Some notes from reading the changes in the bis: * "General-purpose-class devices": Might be just my pet peeve, but I refuse to accept that IoT devices will necessarily not be general-purpose -- they're constrained, but whether general purpose computing is enabled is a matter of firmware openness. Size is orthogonal -- my laptop is general purpose but I'd still move RAM heavy task to server hardware and take pictures with my phone. * The ESP32-U4WDH might serve as an example of C4. * The RAM of smartphones has already not aged too well. (6/8GiB are not too uncommon, eg. Fairphone 4). BR c -- To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater powers. -- Bene Gesserit axiom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
