this paper was submitted on
4 points (100% like it)
4 up votes 0 down votes


subscribe8 readers

Welcome to the public review site of papers appearing in MobiSys 2012. Here you can find the public review written by a PC member for each paper and the authors' rebuttal to it. You can comment on any of them or add your own opinion. Finally you can vote to "like" or "dislike" a paper by clicking the up or down arrows next to its title.

all 2 comments

[–]ConferenceQA 0 points1 point ago* 

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Question: You are using the idle slots to improve throughput. How are you handling passive tags contending for the channel?

Answer: We are using a random value to coordinate the bursts. If you have a sufficiently large population of tags there would be an overlap between the range used for burst notifiers and other tags. To fix this, you would have to use a sufficient number of bits for the random value to avoid this overlap.

Question 2: Another part of your work is to do the duty cycling. Since the passive tags are harvesting energy from the reader, why is this important?

Answer: Passive tags could be harvesting energy from other sources. We would like to minimize the amount of power it wastes, so it can use all of its power for real transmission.

[–]ConferenceQA 1 point2 points ago* 

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Question: You mentioned 664kbps for the stated data rate. Though you show significant improvement, it still is not close to the specification. Do you see other opportunities for improving the throughput?

Answer: That is the rate for actual transmission, but there is a lot of overhead from the protocol and slot generation. We rely on how often the reader generates slots. Without fundamentally altering the protocol it would be hard to improve further; we see Flit as reaching close to the maximum throughput within the current specifications.