[manet] Re: Proposed tweaks to charter text

Hi Juliusz,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>
> Sent: dinsdag 5 november 2024 10:26
> To: Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't <[email protected]>
> Cc: manet <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Proposed tweaks to charter text
> 
> Thanks, Ronald.
> 
> >> OLD: The main advantage of reactive solutions is low protocol overhead.
> >>
> >> NEW: (remove this sentence)
> 
> > Sentence removed. However, does this mean that you are of the opinion
> > that reactive ad hoc routing protocols will under no circumstances
> > have an advantage over pro-active ad hoc routing protocols?
> 
> Not at all, I'm keeping an open mind.  I'm simply of the opinion that the
> debate is still open, and that the charter is not the right place to take
a side.

Fair enough, but what I would like to have in the charter text is some
justification for working on a Standards Track reactive ad hoc routing
protocol specification, which in turn could motivate (new or returning) WG
participants to undertake that work.

> 
> >> 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.
> >>
> 
> > Applied, although I was rather attached to the "federated mobile ad
> > hoc networks" formulation.
> 
> Feel free to reinstate, I don't have a strong opinion on this point.

Perhaps the "kill your darlings" principle applies here...

Thanks,
Ronald

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- Juliusz

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