Re: Your comments on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

Hi Adrian,

Yes my comments requested by last call to be submitted to IESG for the
subject (evaluation purpose) have been ended. However, if I get any
request/receive/read any new issue in IETF, I may comment again to IETF
discuss list. For the OLSRv2 in general comments will never end as long as
there are users and as long the internet mission is development/progress,
but to IESG I have ended the comments (one additional to ietf) which I
mentioned the *end* in my last comment to IESG. They were separate to focus
each comment on separate related view.

I don't know how is the practice of IESG process or Last Call process, but
I have tried many times with the authors before, to make the document
better but they think my comments are not important (which maybe they are
right). Therefore, I don't want to give any permission to share with them,
I will leave it to IESG. If IESG agrees to share any/all comments they
received to any/all author(s), I will have no objection.

Thanking you,

Best Regards

Abdussalam Baryun (AB)
University of Glamorgan, UK
++++++++++++++++++++++
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Abdussalam,
>
> Thank you for your review comments on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt
>
> I see seven separate points raised in separate emails. Can you confirm
> that this
> is the totality of your comments.
>
> I also note that the seventh email was sent to only the IESG. May I have
> your
> permission to share this email with the document authors.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
> > Abdussalam Baryun
> > Sent: 22 August 2012 23:01
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt> (The Optimized
> Link
> State
> > Routing Protocol version 2) to Proposed Standard
> >
> > Reply to your request dated 29/07/2012
> > Draft Reviewed By: Abdussalam Baryun (AB)   Dated: 22/08/2012
> >
> > Reviewer Comment AB7: Comments on text in document history [*].
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2/history/
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > A key difference between RFC3626 and OLSRv2 is the introduction of
> > support for link metrics. An individual draft
> > (draft-dearlove-olsrv2-metrics-00) was submitted in 2007, discussing
> > the design options, culminating in 2010 with
> > draft-dearlove-olsrv2-metrics-05 documenting Working Group consensus
> > on this matter. Metrics support was, then, folded into OLSRv2.
> >
> > AB> the reviewer thinks the difference is that OLSRv2 is a metric base
> > router that uses NHDP and RFC5444 packets which are general MANET
> > interface protocol and general MANET packet format respectively.
> > OLSRv2 is applicable for more scenarios and routers that are
> > constraint devices.
> >
> > This version of OLSRv2 was given a one month WGLC, so as to ensure
> > sufficient time to review the document.
> >
> > AB> my comments within the period was not considered by the authors
> > and don't see any consensus from the WG.
> >
> > There was an issue concerning the differences between the -14 and -15
> > revisions of the document, brought up by one WG member. The consensus
> > opinion from the WG is that the document should proceed, without
> > additional edits.
> >
> > AB> yes there was a new version update after my comments and
> > discussion with the authors, but still not happy with the outcome.
> >
> > Best Regards
> > AB
> > +++++++++++++++++
> > The end of my comments (the comments were 7 including this, two only
> > for the IESG and one addition for only IEFT).
> > ========================================================
> >
> > On 7/29/12, The IESG <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > The IESG has received a request from the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks WG
> > > (manet) to consider the following document:
> > > - 'The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2'
> > >   <draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt> as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> > > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> > > [e-mail] mailing lists by 2012-08-22. Exceptionally, comments
> may be
> > > sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
> > > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. This last
> call
> > > period has been extended to handle the fact that it spans the IETF-84
> > > meeting.
> > >
> > > This last call is being re-initiated to include a notice that this
> document
> > > includes a normative down reference to an Informational RFC:
> > > RFC5148, "Jitter considerations in MANETs".
> > >
> > > Abstract
> > >
> > >    This specification describes version 2 of the Optimized Link State
> > >    Routing (OLSRv2) protocol for Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs).
> > >
> > > The file can be obtained via
> > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2/
> > >
> > > IESG discussion can be tracked via
> > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2/ballot/
> > >
> > >
> > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> > >
>
>