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

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Thu, 05 March 2009 10:38 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.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 8B60028C45F; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 02:38:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.175
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.175 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
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 PNedFNNZWjYF; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 02:37:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC91F28C2FA; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 02:37:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nephilia.intra.cea.fr (nephilia.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.33]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id n25AabuI006628; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:36:37 +0100
Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by nephilia.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n25AcNPS021385; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:38:23 +0100 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.133.173]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.1) with ESMTP id n25AcNQr031749; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:38:23 +0100
Message-ID: <49AFAB9F.3050704@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:38:23 +0100
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: HyungJin Lim <dream.hjlim@gmail.com>
References: <20090304163257.82E843A6B2E@core3.amsl.com> <7e8d02d40903041552r5a38bd1dp59ab865c0f463c@mail.gmail.com> <7e8d02d40903050014u556bd7cbof6d7ec2d54901dd4@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7e8d02d40903050014u556bd7cbof6d7ec2d54901dd4@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.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: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 10:38:02 -0000

HyungJin Lim a écrit :
> I'm sorry for correction about the following comment and duplicate comments.
> My first language is not English.
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *HyungJin Lim* <dream.hjlim@gmail.com <mailto:dream.hjlim@gmail.com>>
> Date: 2009/3/5
> Subject: Re: [Autoconf] WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network 
> Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
> To: iesg@ietf.org <mailto:iesg@ietf.org>
> Cc: autoconf@ietf.org <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>, 
> alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> Inline...
> 
> 2009/3/5 IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org 
> <mailto:iesg-secretary@ietf.org>>
> 
>     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 <mailto: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
>     <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/autoconf>
> 
>     Chair(s):
>     Ryuji Wakikawa [ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com
>     <mailto:ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com>]
>     Thomas Clausen [T.Clausen@computer.org <mailto:T.Clausen@computer.org>]
> 
>     Internet Area Director(s):
>     Jari Arkko [jari.arkko@piuha.net <mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net>]
>     Mark Townsley [townsley@cisco.com <mailto:townsley@cisco.com>]
> 
>     Internet Area Advisor:
>     Jari Arkko [jari.arkko@piuha.net <mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net>]
> 
>     Mailing Lists:
>     General Discussion: autoconf@ietf.org <mailto: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.
> 
>  
> In here, I have a question !
> What's meaning of globally routable addresses ?

I think it's a commonly agreed term, in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture 
  RFC.

> I think globally routable addresses should include topologically correct 
> address and topologically incorrect address.

Correct relative to what?

> The reason I address this is that the NEMO basic support should 
> configure topologically incorrect address in nested NEMO.

I agree: addresses configured within a nested NEMO moving network are 
probably topologically incorrect with respect to the CoA and subnet 
assigned to the top-level Mobile Router egress interface of a parent 
NEMO moving network.

> But topologically incorrect address is also globally routable addresses 
> if it a packet forwarding mechanism (e.g., tunneling) is supported, not 
> packet routing(e.g. OLSR, DYMO, etc.).

I agree.

>     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.
> 
>  
> What's meaning of practical addressing model ?
> *Although we already discussed this issue in MANEMO BoF,* *we should 
> *consider practical scenarios for practical addressing model in real 
> world I think.
> The only simplest scenario *can not* satisfy requirements and other 
> aspects in more complex scenario which include Internet connectivity, 
> nested pattern, group mobility, wireless coverage, and so on.
>  
> I would like suggest to define some requirements for practical scenarios.
> Then, the simplest scenario also can be considered as a base  topic of 
> them I think.

I tend to agree with the approach

I'm just afraid that defining new requirements may lengthen the process 
of coming up with a practical addressing model.  I think the word 
practical is there to just mean that in practice many of us may write an 
addressing model in a very straightforward manner, which would work in 
each one's particular case.

Maybe we could find the practical and easiest simplest most convenient 
way of a common denominator addressing models for some very simple 
dynamic networks.

Alex