[Planetlab-devel] PLC system discussion (in the hall)

[Larry Peterson]

I'm, sorry. I agree not all nodes will support all capabilities... some will
be slicable and others not. Some programmable and others not. But a
PCU seems like a different beast entirely. Like keeping a separate DB
entry for the USB key. I would never ask a CM (or CM proxy) to do any
architecturally-visible thing to a PCU. So the litmus test for me is if
there is every going to be a CM for the device.

I realize we're talking abstractly here, and there is the matter of tracking
PCU information. Why isn't this a "field" associated with the node?

Larry

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Marc E. Fiuczynski
<mef at cs.princeton.edu> wrote:
> Hi Larry,
>
> Btw., there likely is a spectrum of CMs.   E.g., there are some devices that
> will be managed by a CM that does not support slicing (e.g., of wireless
> spectrum), and then there will be devices that wont even permit slicing of
> the CPU (e.g., smart ethernet switches, anagram routers, etc.).  Wrt being
> half-pregnant, where do you draw the line as to when something is a
> component and when it is an implementation detail?
>
> Marc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.planet-lab.org
> https://lists.planet-lab.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>