Re: [Autoconf] new charter

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Teco Boot wrote:
> In a MANET, I expect nodes to run a MANET Routing protocol and
> forward packets.

Well I agree with the last part: MANET nodes do forward packets.  But I 
don't agree with the first part: in a MANET I could configure static 
routes, not necessarily running a MANET routing protocol.

> In ad hoc networks, one (you ?) would say nodes could be hosts or
> Mobile Routers acting as hosts.

Yes.  If the future charter rules these kinds of MANET networks which 
are non-MANET-routing-protocol then I'll go away :-)

> |Do you agree we consider routers mobile only within 25m ranges?
> 
> Absolutely not. For me, 25km is a reasonable distance!

But is that MANET?  Or is it just a 25km subnet?

> Just 10^3 times the distance and 10^6 times the power per bit (single
> hop) or 10^3 times the power per bit if multi-hop is enabled (and
> 1000 intermediate nodes....). Just physical laws here.

Well I agree the physical laws are so.  But I disagree to have 25km 
MANETs in the Charter.  I agree with "25m IPv6 subnets", if they were 
explicitely stated so in the charter.

Alex


Proposed charter pasted below:
J. Arkko wrote earlier:
> 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.
>