[manet] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-qual ity-02 (Ends 2025-10-09)

Hi,

Most radio system design specifications contain graphs that correlate
each modulation-coding-schemas (MCS) signal-to-noise ratio (SNR, the
current channel "budget" for transmitting information) with a
biterror-rate. From a radio vendor's perspective (as far as I can
tell) biterror-rate is just a channel attribute expressed in a certain
way.

The biterror-rate is the superior value for DLEP because it combines
the MCS and the SNR without exporting waveform specific information
that would be more difficult to process and compare (especially
between different radios).

Henning Rogge

On Fri, Oct 3, 2025 at 1:25 AM Don Fedyk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Henning
>
> I read through your drafts and with my WG chair hat off I have one question/comment on the Radio quality document.  While I realize Bit Error rate is a dimensionless quality, I question whether a time reference for the measurement period could be useful to include?
> The other values SNR,  SIGNAL and Noise all seem to be instantaneous values.
>
> With my Work Group chair hat back on. I'm the Shepard for these documents.  I've looked at Shepard questionnaire form, and I will send you a note to make sure I have characterized the responses correctly for when the last call ends.
>
> Thanks
> Don
>
> ________________________________
> From: Donald Eastlake via Datatracker <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2025 3:28 PM
> To: Don Fedyk <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-quality-02 (Ends 2025-10-09)
>
>
> Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-quality-02 (Ends
> 2025-10-09)
>
> This message starts a 2-week WG Last Call for this document.
>
> Abstract:
>    This document defines an extension to the Dynamic Link Exchange
>    Protocol (DLEP) to provide the quality of incoming radio signals.
>
> File can be retrieved from:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-quality/
>
> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected]
> in copy. Objections should be motivated and suggestions to resolve them are
> highly appreciated.
>
> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded again of the
> Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79
> [1]. Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of
> any. Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can
> be found at [3].
>
> Thank you.
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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]