[manet] Re: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-manet-dlep-cha nnel-utilization-01

Hi,

I just uploaded a new revision of the draft that should address all
suggestions in the two reviews.

I was away from the office on a business trip last week, which is why
the updates are a bit late... I plan to update my other two drafts
later today.

Henning Rogge

On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 11:18 PM Russ White via Datatracker
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Document: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-channel-utilization
> Title: DLEP Radio Channel Utilization Extension
> Reviewer: Russ White
> Review result: Has Nits
>
> ==
> They are never reseted and will just increase monotonic.
>
> Maybe:
>
> These four data items monotonically increase for entire duration of the
> connection; they are never reset.
>
> ==
> The first Data Item (Radio Channel Active) announces ...
>
> I think (?) this would be better as a bulleted list or some such, rather than
> paragraph text.
>
> ==
> ... the channels livetime of the radio channel ..
>
> I think this means something like:
>
> ... the total time this channel has been used by the radio for any purpose
> (i.e., the total amount of time the radio has transmitted on this channel) ...
>
> ==
> A radio that doesn't track the time for receiving and transmitting data
> explicitly can just add all times the radio channel is not free into the Radio
> Channel Busy Data Item
>
> I think this might be clearer something like:
>
> If a radio does not track its send or receive times explicitly, it SHOULD still
> calculate and advertise the Radio Channel Busy Time data item.
>
> ==
> The router can calculate statistics on the channel usage ...
>
> Maybe:
>
> The router can calculate channel usage statistics ...
>
> ==
> Is there a potential need for these calculations to apply to either spread
> spectrum or beam forming systems? I suppose these calculations could be "per
> reachable neighbor" in that case, but the document doesn't say anything about
> these situations, so I thought I'd ask.
>
> ==
> Radio Channel Active Item contains information how long the radio channel has
> been active.
>
> The diagram is a little confusing (?) ... it seems to imply there could be
> multiple "active time" sections in the TLV. Maybe something like:
>
> 0                   1                   2                   3
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> | Data Item Type                | Length                        |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |                          Active Time                          |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |                          ...........                          |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
> ...and then explain the "active time" is one field?
>
> ==
> Same thing for the busy and rx data item, etc. fields.
>
> ==
> Active Time: Time in nanoseconds since the channel has been active.
>
> This could be read two different ways:
>
> - How long has it been since the last transmission on this channel
> - The total amount of time this channel has been in use
>
> >From the text, the latter is what's wanted, but the text above allows for
> either. Maybe:
>
> Active Time: Time in nanoseconds this channel has been in use.
>
> ==
> ... Time in nanoseconds the local radio was receiving data ...
>
> Maybe:
>
> ... Time in nanoseconds the local radio has received data ...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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]