[manet] Re: MANET Internetworking: Problem Statement and G ap Analysis

Thank you for the follow-up, AB – we will add something about use cases in the next draft version.

Fred

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2025 7:11 AM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] List <[email protected]>; Jakubisin, Daniel <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [manet] MANET Internetworking: Problem Statement and Gap Analysis

EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments.


Hi Fred,

thanks for your reply,

On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 7:00 PM Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello AB, and thank you for these comments. Please see below for responses:

Regards – Fred Templin

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2025 10:13 AM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [manet] MANET Internetworking: Problem Statement and Gap Analysis

Hi Fred,

I read the draft but still need to see the interest/solution in disaster_scenarios, which your assumption was not clear to me, as we using 5G network/cells or only MANETs, I think your use case is using the internet of wireless_terrestrial_network/5G_network, so I don't think we can say MANET of MANETs, because the 5G network already is using its management protocols and routing protocols that are different to MANET. Or please explain from where some of the cell phones/router are getting the internet service? I think the draft needs to identify the terrestrial network as use cases, IMHO to make it general will never help.

>> Yes, the expectation is that Internet-facing proxies will receive Internet access from provider infrastructure
>> through traditional service provider models such as 5G, then provide MANET-facing interfaces to support
>> Internet connection-sharing services to MANET nodes that cannot directly engage provider infrastructure
>> themselves. So, maybe a more acceptable way to phrase the big-picture view of an Internet structured in
>> this way is a “network-of-(Mobile Ad-hoc) networks”?
[...]

 [...]

The concern is
for vast numbers of small to modest-sized MANETs that interconnect
using the Internet as transit where there are no constraints on the
nature of MANET-to-MANET interconnection events.

I think the draft needs more definitions and clarifying the disaster networking.

>> Would it help to include a section on use cases? I think others have tried to do that in the past
>> but did not receive traction. If you think use case text would be helpful, I think it should be a
>> couple of paragraphs at most and not multiple pages otherwise the draft could become
>> marginalized.


Yes I agree, or  the problem statement section, in the begining could include the scenarios or use cases of such disaster solution/network, and may include other use_cases or network services that are similar to our purpose/interest.

best regards
AB

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