[manet] Re: Proposed tweaks to charter text

Hi Juliusz and WG Chair,

Thanks for this update discussion of the charter and proposals,

We had two presentations in 119 and 120 for recharter text, is the text you
refer/attached to is it one of them.

1)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/119/materials/slides-119-manet-charter-revision-discussions-02.pdf
2)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/120/materials/slides-120-manet-a-charter-text-proposal-00.pdf

I want to add my opinion but need to have one reference point that this WG
refers to for discussion in this meeting.

best regards

AB

On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 11:17 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi, and sorry for the delay.
>
> qHere are a few proposed tweaks to the charter text.  Most are fairly
> minor, the only one I feel strongly about is the removal of the sentence
> about the overhead of proactive protocols.  I also feel it's important to
> mention that the reliance of PIM-SM on RPF disqualifies it from (most)
> MANETs, lest somebody be misled into thinking that PIM-SM can be easily
> tweaked.
>
>
> OLD: the protocol for exchange for link-related information
>
> NEW: the protocol for exchange of link-related information
>
>
> OLD: (mixtures of fixed and mobile routers)
>
> NEW: (mixtures of fixed and mobile routers, and of wired and wireless
> links)
>
>
> OLD: Babel and OLSRv2 meet this requirement
>
> NEW: Babel and OLSRv2 meet these requirements
>
>
> OLD: manual configurations or the inference of state through routing or
>      transport protocols does not allow the router to make the best
>      decisions.
>
> NEW: manual configurations or the inference of state through routing or
>      transport protocols is not practical.
>
>
> OLD: The main advantage of reactive solutions is low protocol overhead.
>
> NEW: (remove this sentence)
>
>
> OLD: Traditional multicast routing solutions (e.g., PIM SM) tend to perform
>      poorly in mobile ad hoc network environments, due to high churn of
>      maintaining group membership state in the nodes in frequently changing
>      network topologies.
>
> NEW: Traditional multicast routing solutions, such as PIM-SM, are not
>      applicable to the MANET environment due to their reliance on RPF as
>      well as to the high churn of maintaining group membership state in
>      frequently changing network topologies.
>
>
> OLD: homogeneous link layer / physical layer technologies.
>
> NEW: homogeneous link and physical layer technologies.
>
>
> OLD: The WG will explore multicast routing solutions in support of
>      heterogeneous wireless technology configurations and federated mobile
>      ad hoc networks.
>
> NEW: The WG will explore multicast routing solutions that are applicable
>      in mobile ad-hoc networks and heterogeneous network topologies.
>
>
> OLD: Multicast solutions for mobile ad hoc networks based on heterogeneous
>      wireless technologies
>
> NEW: Multicast solutions for mobile ad hoc networks based on heterogeneous,
>      wired and wireless technologies
>
>
> OLD: Exploring feasibility of Standards Track reactive routing solution
>      based on AODVv2
>
> NEW: Exploring feasibility of Standards Track reactive routing solutions,
>      possibly based on AODVv2
>
>
> OLD: Progressing DAT-metric specification
>
> NEW: Progressing DAT metric specification
>
>
> OLD: Babel extensions
>
> NEW: Babel extensions and maintenance
>
>
> OLD: OLSRv2 extensions
>
> NEW: OLSRv2 extensions and maintenance
>
>
> OLD: DLEP extensions, DLEP corrections & clarifications document
>
> NEW: DLEP extensions and maintenance
>
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]