Re: [Autoconf] Autoconf addressing model

"Joe Macker" <joseph.macker@nrl.navy.mil> Thu, 05 March 2009 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <joseph.macker@nrl.navy.mil>
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 51F6D28C360 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:45:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.15
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449, 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 tNzF7TlmF323 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:45:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.83.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB9F28C31C for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:45:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id n25Giv8O029056; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:45:06 -0500
Received: (from sextant [132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SMSSMTP 4.1.16.48) with SMTP id M2009030511450422724 ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:45:04 -0500
From: "Joe Macker" <joseph.macker@nrl.navy.mil>
To: "'Dearlove, Christopher \(UK\)'" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>, "'Alexandru Petrescu'" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>, "'Teco Boot'" <teco@inf-net.nl>
References: <499F0BA7.90501@piuha.net> <7E8A76F7-2CE0-463A-8EE8-8877C46B4715@gmail.com> <49A6D436.7020505@gmail.com><000001c99845$1dc56190$595024b0$@nl> <49A6F125.40400@gmail.com><1235680887.4585.5.camel@localhost> <002f01c998bf$8f112210$ad336630$@nl><49A7E58C.2020303@gmail.com> <007201c99903$c4182c80$4c488580$@nl><49A82E55.10208@gmail.com> <007b01c99911$907facf0$b17f06d0$@nl><49A8471E.6090506@gmail.com> <009501c99920$92154340$b63fc9c0$@nl><49A944FF.9000102@gmail.com> <003001c99b2c$a3fcf4a0$ebf6dde0$@nl><49AD5184.6080300@gmail.com> <000101c99c3c$3121a870$9364f950$@nl><49AD9760.3080909@gmail.com> <49AD98D4.3@earthlink.net><49AD9EA8.6040803@gmail.com> <49ADA17B.9040600@earthlink.net><49ADAF7C.1050509@gmail.com> <49ADB9FB.6050600@earthlink.net><49AE3A3A.5000305@gmail.com> <7FB7EE0A621BA44B8B69E5F0A09DC76407B5D783@xmb-rtp-208.amer.cisco.com><49AE9827.5090309@gmail.com> <000c01c99ce9$e09bf500$a1d3df00$@nl><49AEB846.5020103@gmail.com> <000101c99d00$664c7f60$32e57e20$@nl> <49AF1! ! 292.30502 08@gmail.co m> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D01A44733@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
In-Reply-To: <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D01A44733@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:44:58 -0500
Message-ID: <001901c99db1$b8989770$29c9c650$@macker@nrl.navy.mil>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcmdI1O5bovQKRycQgGOO7OZ37rV5gAZx51wAAmiN0A=
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Autoconf addressing model
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: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:45:03 -0000

IMHO, many successful manet networks are often partially planned.

Chris RFC 2501 attempts to tip its hat in this direction

--------
  The technology of Mobile Ad hoc Networking is somewhat synonymous
   with Mobile Packet Radio Networking (a term coined via during early
   military research in the 70's and 80's), Mobile Mesh Networking (a
   term that appeared in an article in The Economist regarding the
   structure of future military networks) and Mobile, Multihop, Wireless
   Networking (perhaps the most accurate term, although a bit
   cumbersome).
---------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:autoconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 7:10 AM
> To: Alexandru Petrescu; Teco Boot
> Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Autoconf addressing model
> 
> 
> > Along these lines, an interpretation of 'ad-hoc' is a happening which
> > hasn't been planned, spontaneous, etc.
> 
> That is the dictionary definition of ad hoc. But "ad hoc network"
> has become a term of art, whose fundamentals are about decentralised,
> cooperative, multi-hop routing. (I'm not sure if RFC 2501 attempts
> a definition, I haven't checked it recently.) "ad hoc" got attached
> to such networks because they often were/are ad hoc in the dictionary
> sense. But often ad hoc networks are not completely unplanned, but
> still retain that label.
> 
> ********************************************************************
> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
> distribute its contents to any other person.
> ********************************************************************
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> Autoconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf