[manet] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: draft-dearlove-manet-olsrv2 -responsive-03

Just speaking as a WG participant, RFC 7181 seems pretty big and doing a
bis of it  like a big effort that would take some time. Meanwhile,
draft-dearlove-manet-olsrv2-responsive seems pretty short and simple. I
think the WG should consider the "responsive" draft separately. If it is
approved and if an RFC 7181bis project was started, the changes in the
"responsive" draft could be rolled into a 7181bis.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 [email protected]


On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 11:30 AM Christopher Dearlove <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I was very much discussing the 7181/ OLSRv2 situation, complicated by the
> splitting off of NHDP/6130. New protocols should be in a number of pieces
> appropriate to their design. This is often one, but not always.
>
> On 20 Mar 2026, at 14:16, Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Hi Abdussalam,
>
>
>
> >> https://github.com/OLSR/OONF
>
> >> yes this is it
>
>
>
> I can now confirm that this builds correctly and seems to do the right
> things when run over simple networks. I will work on testing over more
> complex networks.
>
>
>
> Thank you - Fred
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Abdussalam Baryun <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 19, 2026 8:43 PM
> *To:* Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* Christopher Dearlove <[email protected]>;
> [email protected] List <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] [manet] Re:
> draft-dearlove-manet-olsrv2-responsive-03
>
>
>
> EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments.
>
>
>
>
> Hi Fred,
>
>
>
> and thanks,
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 4:40 PM Templin (US), Fred L <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Abdussalam,
>
>
>
> >> I tried to get an implementation that was from the open source
> community but that implementation did not work.
>
>
>
> Was this the one you were looking at:
>
>
>
> https://github.com/OLSR/OONF
>
>
>
> yes this is it
>
>
>
> The most recent tag from that distribution is v0.15.1 tagged on March 19,
> 2018. I am unable to build from that tag due to compile time errors which
> seems a poor state for it to be left in. If there is another
> publicly-available OLSRv2 reference implementation I would be interested to
> hear about it, because it is not a good look for OLSRv2 to not have a
> publicly-available reference implementation **that works** for evaluation
> and experimentation by the community.
>
>
>
> Meanwhile, other MANET routing protocols such as OSPF-MDR in quagga and
> Babel in free range routing are openly available for experimentation and
> even semi-production service in a form that works. There is also
> B.A.T.M.A.N which I guess is becoming known as a functional mesh networking
> service. There are probably others too which I would be interested to hear
> about. What has been your experience?
>
>
>
> yes agree,  it is important that we in IETF MANET WG look into the
> implementation of both OLSRv2 and AODVv2, as these were the first routing
> that was needed by this WG, however, there was in past meeting interest by
> our WG that we use the implementations to check its stability and
> successfulness.
>
>
>
> best regards,
>
> AB
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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]