Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Nicolas review, question #4: Routing protocols
Mitar <mmitar@gmail.com> Thu, 14 April 2016 09:25 UTC
Return-Path: <mmitar@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F144012D61E for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fz2d61S0guiF for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x244.google.com (mail-io0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B10D812D144 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x244.google.com with SMTP id u185so10251421iod.2 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WDGgJtr6H8O69JVHsgsxu/Lzem8FGf8ajbeG4Y514MU=; b=CuvPNvj0V3UsQPgaFe14a46BPVJVY8y3Sxedu+vQgl6HN/j15zayCUERNRifxPEiIU 13WGCD8l5Ut0CupjzQFq4kgxfcWxBkLRkHR6ZFRj49deMBqy7sA1yG9TH2i2uNPJqglu GgrLwsjDsVABI489Md/EvGBUWI5S0OVgOZOZimX+sZfkxQ1ddwTORB2jIstUSX85CPO0 /ZXe6e0AXvsV1W4jwwMDHdkkheaeZOjbNlS3/LvGK9xMreN6duhhi1TNIGYCGshAl8Mj awII0B97krei+UZeYUDF5wtTfV9AhM6YLnw2kPX+rHmtlrgvNGH9M1TLbXvTW8Duq9/d bqRQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WDGgJtr6H8O69JVHsgsxu/Lzem8FGf8ajbeG4Y514MU=; b=T2thYwN81BHR4PTLY0H9UPyeGaZOEUjXrQclqQMvvObATFo1uLYk+bDa3aAAz1mDNJ jeZLRAMofd3zBKLLlu9Hn+2enDzsAUD/H904ygCJ2imVmH5PiTgTo7FKVKzepn5MSBUS nwSEtuPwDYmH1apYO3vvIismmotXGeQJIRZOcIK2dIsCtp8PXQtlL9X+qfgAbWM2nmiI RbZu7kSpGdPcCJkXGjN52jZlIT8PmFzdMd2nakTUaydVnoNu1vVE1dZs9MEssftskwNN +PjWge/j1HrkxxjK/0AMVw6zUInZF1wrDraQxiakRi4X7nDZjpCcb8QHN4XbbyRhoKZc EP7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXyaSKYG4EDzo5wsj/dH8Ux0scTxUwLr492bC8nXD1vm/uW+l7dVOysCl99DGSrg3bzk6J1s5eBEhM4fw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.134.8 with SMTP id i8mr14515669iod.130.1460625922943; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.146.131 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <040001d19623$cd8dd060$68a97120$@unizar.es>
References: <004a01d194c2$ef92da00$ceb88e00$@unizar.es> <CAKLmikM8w9hEt3DE0KwQPCa-MRVnW=z+x1aqn=AdtuHWEAFd3Q@mail.gmail.com> <040001d19623$cd8dd060$68a97120$@unizar.es>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 02:25:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKLmikNq8ZFPkqFS+unSbSZgudTX2nZ60EvyAERwaD_S+qQkCQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mitar <mmitar@gmail.com>
To: Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gaia/zaoaJ7RWtH2DS-DcUfN4MsU13Z4>
Cc: gaia <gaia@irtf.org>, Nicolás Echániz <nicoechaniz@altermundi.net>
Subject: Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Nicolas review, question #4: Routing protocols
X-BeenThere: gaia@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Global Access to the Internet for All <gaia.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gaia/>
List-Post: <mailto:gaia@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:25:26 -0000
Hi! On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote: > What about this new version? Thanks! I have just sent my take on this section. Feel free to use/combine at your own discretion. > The Better Approach To Mobile Adhoc Networking (BATMAN) [Abolhasan] > protocol was developed by members of the Freifunk community. The > protocol handles all routing at layer 2, creating one bridged > network. BATMAN-Advanced, which supports roaming inside a mesh > network is nowadays more popular. To be precise: BATMAN was layer 3 protocol. I do not think anybody uses it at it is. It has evolved into BATMAN-Advanced (layer 2) and BMX6. Mitar > Parallel to BGP, some networks also run the BMX6 protocol > [Neumann_a], which started as a fork of BATMAN. It is based on IPv6 > and tries to exploit the social structure of Alternative Networks. > > In [Neumann_b] a study of three proactive mesh routing protocols used > in wireless community networks (BMX6, OLSR, and Babel) is presented, > in terms of scalability, performance, and stability. > > Best regards, > > Jose > >> >> Also, not sure if people here are familiar, but this event is very interesting, where >> many community networks come together and compare various routing protocols >> and their configurations in a real common >> testbed: >> >> http://battlemesh.org/ >> >> If people are interested in this stuff, you should come this year. It will be in Porto, >> Portugal. >> >> >> Mitar >> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote: >> > Hi, Nicolás, >> > >> >> >> >> # Section 7.1.2.2 >> >> When refering to bmx6, the wording: " this is an advanced version of >> >> the >> > BATMAN >> >> protocol" is confusing as the other popular BATMAN derivative is >> >> called >> > batman- >> >> advanced. >> >> >> >> Maybe this section could have more extensive information as it >> >> actually >> > represents >> >> the core of much development in the Community Network movement. >> > >> > This would be the new version of this section: >> > Please feel free to suggest your improvements to the text. >> > >> > 7.1.2. Routing protocols >> > >> > As stated in previous sections, Alternative Networks are composed of >> > possibly different layer 2 devices, resulting in a mesh of nodes. >> > Connection between different nodes is not guaranteed and the link >> > stability can vary strongly over time. To tackle this, some >> > Alternative Networks use mesh network routing protocols while other >> > networks use more traditional routing protocols. Some networks >> > operate multiple routing protocols in parallel. For example, they >> > may use a mesh protocol inside different islands and rely on >> > traditional routing protocols to connect these islands. >> > >> > 7.1.2.1. Traditional routing protocols >> > >> > The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), as defined by [RFC4271] is used by >> > a number of Community Networks, because of its well-studied behavior >> > and scalability. >> > >> > For similar reasons, smaller networks opt to run the Open Shortest >> > Path First (OSPF) protocol, as defined by [RFC2328]. >> > >> > 7.1.2.2. Mesh routing protocols >> > >> > A large number of Alternative Networks use the Optimized Link State >> > Routing Protocol (OLSR) as defined in [RFC3626]. The pro-active link >> > state routing protocol is a good match with Alternative Networks >> > because it has good performance in mesh networks where nodes have >> > multiple interfaces. >> > >> > The Better Approach To Mobile Adhoc Networking (BATMAN) [Abolhasan] >> > protocol was developed by members of the Freifunk community. The >> > protocol handles all routing at layer 2, creating one bridged >> > network. >> > >> > Parallel to BGP, some networks also run the BatMan-eXperimental >> > (BMX6) protocol [Neumann_a]. This is an evolved version of the >> > BATMAN protocol which is based on IPv6 and tries to exploit the >> > social structure of Alternative Networks. In [Neumann_b] a study of >> > three proactive mesh routing protocols is presented, in terms of >> > scalability, performance, and stability. >> > >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Jose >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > gaia mailing list >> > gaia@irtf.org >> > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia >> >> >> >> -- >> http://mitar.tnode.com/ >> https://twitter.com/mitar_m >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gaia mailing list >> gaia@irtf.org >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia > > -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m