Re: Discussion of WG charter draft

Abdussalam Baryun <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.manet
Message-ID <CADnDZ88=r5kDM3Hz0Ay+0=9GMm_E87xbUZ5WQmRw4-f2wKdFJw@mail.gmail.com>
update to my points with Ronald's as from meeting:

 - The MANET WG is responsible for the maintenance of OLSRv2 [RFC 7181],
NHDP [RFC 6130] and the Generalized MANET Packet/Message Format [RFC5444],
and their extensions – Keep, obvious. Potential topics:

 ○ Guidance on use of (lesser known) OLSRv2 features to accommodate
specific use cases (informational document)
 ○ Hybrid proactive / reactive operation based on an OLSRv2 extension
 ○ Hybrid proactive / DTN operation based an OLSRv2 extension
 ○ Better MPR selection heuristics
 ○ Guidance on OLSRv2 restart
 ○ RFC 7779 (DAT Metric) to Proposed Standard
 ○ RFC 7722 (Multi-Topology Extension to OLSRv2) to Proposed Standard
 ○ Others?

 - Potential new work items on the revised charter:
 ● DLEP Maintenance & Extensions – Obvious
 ● Babel Maintenance & Extensions – Obvious
 ● Babel for IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi) Mesh – For discussion
 ● Energy-efficient routing in MANETs – For discussion
 ● New approaches to multicast in MANETs – For discussion
 ○ Bitstring-based (inspired by BIER)
 ○ Federation of heterogeneous MANETs with different (proprietary) solutions
 ● Autonomous / ‘asynchronous’ management for MANETs – For discussion, more
speculative (Former AD: “I don’t want to see a DTNMA for MANET”) ● Reactive
MANET routing protocol – A previous AODVv2 effort was dropped
 ● Hybrid (pro-active / reactive) routing protocol – For discussion, need
Reactive first?
● RFC 2501bis, Informational overview of MANET Routing Performance
Evaluation – For discussion
 ● Other topics that WG participants would want to work on?


On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:26 AM Abdussalam Baryun <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> This is a draft of my understanding/update on the re-charter proposal with
> related discussions of previous meetings/list_comments,
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The WG Charter Proposal:
>
> Updating MANET use case work
> Proactive Routing: OLSRv2 development work
> DLEP development work
> Multicast Implementation and defining problems to be solved
> Reactive Routing: AODVv2 implementation and adoption (check ref [2] [3])
> Reactive Routing: DSRv2 implementation
>
> Milestones:
> - The DLEP drafts are updated and will be submitted to IESG.
> - Implementations of experimental WG RFCs
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> My understanding from previous discussions and last meeting [1]:
> - There are three drafts requesting for this WG adoption but still waiting
> (draft are now dated expired)
> - I proposed evaluation of all MANET experimental RFCs within last meeting
> - I proposed update of RFC2501 and write a draft for MANET use cases
> within last meeting.
> - There are some suggestions to develop RFC7181/OLSRv2 for future if there
> are demand (some comments on list from participants).
> - The AODVv2 draft is requesting WG adoption
> - There is interest and welling from Charlie to work on AODVv2 (with
> submitted draft, and presentation for this meeting)
> - Two participants requesting that new work to be implemented in open
> source software (OSS) (e.g. as willingness of participation of
> implementation in OSS is not clear in this WG).
> - There is interest and welling from me to work on manet use cases and
> technologies (mentioned in meeting, work in progress, not yet submitted
> draft_00)
> - There is interest and welling from Ronald to work on manet multicast
> (mentioned in meeting, and not yet submitted draft_00), even though there
> was some comments in the last meeting from one participant that
> manet_muticast has problems.
> - There is interest and welling from me to work on DSRv2 (mentioned in
> meeting, and not yet submitted draft), also interest and welling to
> implement.
> - The Babel protocol development and new_work to be included and there are
> wellings to support as participants of their WG joined with MANET WG.
> - No clear interest from the WG on hybrid routing, but there was some
> discussions on the list.
>
> +++++++++++++++++++
>
> References:
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-118-manet/
> [2]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/qEyyrWc6rKkcHlk2JGU1cF-wo2Q/
> [3]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/Nr6cgHgSU17PoSqHuFCfxCBwRyc/
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.