[manet] Re: MANET WG Charter and MANET Internetworking

Thanks for this Donald, but I feel we may need to reset this discussion somewhat since
my (up to now) unspoken assumptions seem to be fading from the evolving draft text.

The assumptions are that each MANET router should be able to obtain stable and
unchanging Provider Independent (PI) prefix(es) and be able to use IP addresses from
a PI prefix for Internetworking purposes whenever the MANET is in contact with the
Internet in a manner consistent with Distributed Mobility Management (DMM). The
MANET router should be able to continue to use stable addresses  from a PI prefix
even if the MANET connects to a new Internet access point, even if the MANET router
moves to a different MANET, or even if the MANET router comes into direct contact
with an Internet access point and begins acting as an ordinary mobile node. A
MANET router should also be able to operate with multiple interfaces - some of
Which may be MANET interfaces and others ordinary interfaces - and represent
IP addresses from stable PI prefixes over any and all of those interfaces. This
naturally brings encapsulation, prefix delegation and DMM into the discussion.

Where the draft charter text seems to be leading is toward nomadic MANETs
in which all nodes renumber when a new Internet access point is encountered.
Where I think the text needs to be expanded is to include the use case of global
DMM where each MANET router can maintain a stable set of PI prefixes and
maintain continuous communications without readdressing even across
mobility events.

Thank you - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donald Eastlake <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 2:40 PM
> To: manet <[email protected]>
> Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: MANET WG Charter and MANET Internetworking
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for all this discussion. I think we are making progress. He is
> some possible updated wording I have come up with:
> 
> "MANET routing protocols discover multi-hop IP forwarding paths within
> a bounded networking region. Such regions need to be able to operate
> autonomously when isolated and to provide Internet access when they
> are connected to the Internet including access to nodes in other MANET
> regions also connected to the Internet. Nodes in such MANET regions
> may have multiple interfaces that need to be configured. It may be
> desirable for larger MANET regions to be able to dynamically organize
> themselves into smaller clusters. The working group will analyze
> existing standard protocols and established practices to identify gaps
> in providing these services."
> 
> (I was traveling Thursday and am staying at a relative's house through
> early next week where there is no Wi-Fi Internet access and spotty
> cell service. So I may not be able to respond quickly. I'm typing this
> on a restaurant Wi-Fi service...)
> 
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ===============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
>  [email protected]
> 
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 4:02 PM Templin (US), Fred L
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 11:56 AM
> > > To: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: manet <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> > > Subject: [manet] Re: MANET WG Charter and MANET Internetworking
> > >
> > > RFC2501 is still the primary reference for IETF MANET.
> > >
> > > The inspiration for IETF MANET came from 1990s-era programs including US DoD Task Force XXI (google: "DoD Task Force XXI") and DARPA
> > > GloMo (google: "DARPA GloMo") which determined that standard OSPF was unsuitable for operation in dynamic tactical networks.
> >
> > In still earlier decades, there was the DoD Packet Radio program mentioned by RFC2501 (google: "DoD Packet Radio SRI").
> > I went to work for SRI in 1997, and the SRI Packet Radio van was parked outside my office building as a historical artifact. Not too many
> people remember that one of the first nodes on the Internet (ARPNET at that time) was mobile.
> >
> > > One of our recent documents is here:
> > > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10758044
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>
> > > > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 10:48 AM
> > > > To: Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]>
> > > > Cc: Donald Eastlake <[email protected]>; manet <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> > > > Subject: Re: [manet] Re: MANET WG Charter and MANET Internetworking
> > > >
> > > > >> and that it cannot renumber at that point?
> > > > >
> > > > > [...]
> > > > >
> > > > > So, MANET-wide renumbering is possible but would be an onerous task
> > > >
> > > > Ok, that makes sense, thanks.
> > > >
> > > > > There have been many decades of investigation into MANET use cases
> > > > > (disaster relief, manned/unmanned vehicular communications, tactical
> > > > > military, many others) and they all have the commonality that a MANET
> > > > > can form based on an arbitrary collection of nodes coming together in
> > > > > a common operating region to spontaneously form a multi-hop connected
> > > > > network even outside of the presence of supporting Internet infrastructure.
> > > >
> > > > I'd appreciate references, if you have them.
> > > >
> > > > -- Juliusz
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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]