Re: [Autoconf] WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)

"Stan Ratliff (sratliff)" <sratliff@cisco.com> Wed, 04 March 2009 21:10 UTC

Return-Path: <sratliff@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6403C28C421; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:10:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tmW24moRDkX5; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:10:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 278C128C456; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:10:22 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,302,1233532800"; d="scan'208";a="261425369"
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2009 21:10:50 +0000
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n24LAoCf019630; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:10:50 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n24LAoHE014866; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 21:10:50 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-208.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.43]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:10:50 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:10:49 -0500
Message-ID: <7FB7EE0A621BA44B8B69E5F0A09DC76407B5DB01@xmb-rtp-208.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <49AEDBB5.8090408@polytechnique.edu>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Autoconf] WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
Thread-Index: AcmdAqDv3MwjcY+KRUKU6uCPv6EUBAACtl6g
References: <20090304163257.82E843A6B2E@core3.amsl.com> <49AEBBEA.7020400@gmail.com><000001c99cfe$0d927ca0$28b775e0$@nl> <49AEDBB5.8090408@polytechnique.edu>
From: "Stan Ratliff (sratliff)" <sratliff@cisco.com>
To: "Ulrich Herberg" <ulrich.herberg@polytechnique.edu>, "Teco Boot" <teco@inf-net.nl>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Mar 2009 21:10:50.0123 (UTC) FILETIME=[B1E12DB0:01C99D0D]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=7283; t=1236201050; x=1237065050; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sratliff@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Stan=20Ratliff=20(sratliff)=22=20<sratliff@cisc o.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[Autoconf]=20WG=20Review=3A=20Recharter =20of=20Ad-Hoc=20Network=20Autoconfiguration=20(autoconf) |Sender:=20 |To:=20=22Ulrich=20Herberg=22=20<ulrich.herberg@polytechniq ue.edu>,=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=22Teco=20Boot=22=20<teco @inf-net.nl>; bh=ipzdyH6Jz55Vwt4YIX1e4R5zMab82DsRsSw/EcUAm0I=; b=ghZbrFntBexuypJ93X2z9LDvDhDkf9oWSweEyJ9Ab57y9vaPUjjwQsG8t4 oKaGaNDr3PAQtckbUiQ9xrDZAdgx6TYjBIGosymUFbtpQ9gdrv9C6KyDXwe4 DASKpw8v+M;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=sratliff@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, T.Clausen@computer.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 21:10:24 -0000

Inline 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:autoconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ulrich Herberg
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:51 PM
> To: Teco Boot
> Cc: autoconf@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org; T.Clausen@computer.org
> Subject: Re: [Autoconf] WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc 
> Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
> 
> Inline
> 
> Teco Boot wrote:
> > Inline.
> >
> > |-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > |Van: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:autoconf-bounces@ietf.org] 
> > |Namens Alexandru Petrescu
> > |Verzonden: woensdag 4 maart 2009 18:36
> > |CC: autoconf@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org; T.Clausen@computer.org
> > |Onderwerp: Re: [Autoconf] WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network 
> > |Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
> > |
> > |I would like to suggest: add explicitely that the practical 
> > |addressing model should work at least with manual and 
> static routes.  
> > |And that the practical addressing model should not be 
> preconditioned 
> > |by the use of OLSR nor DYMO in the ad-hoc network.
> >
> > I think the addressing model has little to do with the 
> method how to 
> > assign and configure the addresses. This is a next step. I 
> wonder if 
> > any model exclude what you are asking for. Worried for some 
> reason???
> >   
> I don't see why the charter should explicitly mention that 
> the addressing model should work with manual and static 
> routes. As Teco said, this would be part of the solution 
> space, i.e. it could be part of a draft that describes an 
> autoconf mechanism.
> 
> > I would not suggest working with static routes in a mobile 
> ad hoc network.
> >   
> Well, as said, I don't think that's part of the discussion we 
> lead here concerning the charter.
> > I agree on the last one, the model should apply to other 
> MANET Routing 
> > Protocols as well. OSPF-MANET is an important one, not forgetting 
> > others, including multicast.
> >   
> Yes, but I don't think it should be mentioned in the charter. 
> The charter does not say anything that the addressing model 
> should have any preconditions for a particular MANET routing 
> protocol. Otherwise, it would need to list a large number of 
> routing protocols (OLSR, OLSRv2, OSPF, AODV,....)
> >  
> > |Also suggest: specifically mention which link-layers are being 
> > |considered for ad-hoc networks.  I personally consider 802.11, 
> > |802.15.4, wired Ethernet, USB and eventually 802.16.  If 
> anybody else 
> > |considers other link-layers please mention them.
> >
> > I consider other link layers, but I will not mention them. I do not 
> > know all details or even a complete list. And if I would, 
> it doesn't 
> > help. I think it is sufficient and more useful to describe 
> the MANET link characteristics.
> >   
> 
> I agree with Teco. MANETs can run on a number of different L2 
> technologies with certain characteristics. These 
> characteristics should be mentioned in the document to be 
> written, but not in the charter. In my opinion, no specific 
> L2 should be mentioned.
> 
> Ulrich

Ditto what Ulrich says. I fail to understand why the selection of a Layer 2 technology should impact the assignmnet of Layer 3 addresses, therefore, I see no need to call out any specific L2.

Regards,
Stan


> > Teco.
> >
> >
> > |
> > |Alex
> > |
> > |IESG Secretary a écrit :
> > |> A modified charter has been submitted for the Ad-Hoc Network 
> > |> Autoconfiguration working group in the Internet Area of 
> the IETF.  
> > |> The IESG has not made any determination as yet.  The modified 
> > |> charter is provided below for informational purposes 
> only.  Please 
> > |> send your
> > |comments
> > |> to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by Wednesday, 
> March 11, 2009.
> > |>
> > |> Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
> > |> -------------------------------------------------------------
> > |> Last Modified: 2009-02-18
> > |>
> > |> Current Status: Active Working Group
> > |>
> > |> Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/autoconf
> > |>
> > |> Chair(s):
> > |> Ryuji Wakikawa [ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com] Thomas Clausen 
> > |> [T.Clausen@computer.org]
> > |>
> > |> Internet Area Director(s):
> > |> Jari Arkko [jari.arkko@piuha.net]
> > |> Mark Townsley [townsley@cisco.com]
> > |>
> > |> Internet Area Advisor:
> > |> Jari Arkko [jari.arkko@piuha.net]
> > |>
> > |> Mailing Lists:
> > |> General Discussion: autoconf@ietf.org To Subscribe: 
> > |> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
> > |> Archive:
> > |> 
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/maillist.html
> > |>
> > |> Description of Working Group:
> > |>
> > |> In order to communicate among themselves, ad hoc nodes (refer to 
> > |> RFC
> > |> 2501) need to configure their network interface(s) with local
> > |addresses
> > |> that are valid within an ad hoc network. Ad hoc nodes 
> may also need 
> > |> to configure globally routable addresses, in order to 
> communicate 
> > |> with devices on the Internet. From the IP layer 
> perspective, an ad 
> > |> hoc network presents itself as a L3 multi-hop network 
> formed over a 
> > |> collection of links.
> > |>
> > |> The main purpose of the AUTOCONF WG is to describe the addressing
> > |model
> > |> for ad hoc networks and how nodes in these networks 
> configure their 
> > |> addresses. It is required that such models do not cause problems 
> > |> for
> > |ad
> > |> hoc-unaware parts of the system, such as standard applications 
> > |> running on an ad hoc node or regular Internet nodes 
> attached to the 
> > |> ad hoc nodes. This group's effort may include the development of 
> > |> new protocol mechanisms, should the existing IP 
> autoconfiguration 
> > |> mechanisms be
> > |found
> > |> inadequate. However, the first task of the working group is to
> > |describe
> > |> one practical addressing model for ad hoc networks.
> > |>
> > |> Once this sole work item is completed, the group can be 
> rechartered 
> > |> to work on additional issues.
> > |>
> > |> Goals and Milestones:
> > |>
> > |> Apr 2009 Submit initial draft on address configuration in ad hoc
> > |networks
> > |> Sep 2009 Submit address configuration draft to IESG as 
> > |> Informational
> > |or
> > |> close WG
> > |>
> > |> _______________________________________________
> > |> Autoconf mailing list
> > |> Autoconf@ietf.org
> > |> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
> > |>
> > |
> > |_______________________________________________
> > |Autoconf mailing list
> > |Autoconf@ietf.org
> > |https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Autoconf mailing list
> > Autoconf@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
> >   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> Autoconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>