Your comments on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt
"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Thu, 23 August 2012 09:40 UTC
Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A443B21F8600; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 02:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Df6PwREbYDm8; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 02:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEACE21F85F4; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 02:40:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q7N9eqit022620; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:40:52 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q7N9epct022614 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:40:51 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Abdussalam Baryun' <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
Subject: Your comments on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:40:49 +0100
Message-ID: <170101cd8113$61658fa0$2430aee0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac2BEtt1aR3ksgeTSaO2uwdh+ms1ww==
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2.all@tools.ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 09:40:55 -0000
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: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Abdussalam Baryun > Sent: 22 August 2012 23:01 > To: iesg@ietf.org > 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 <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> 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 > > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-08-22. Exceptionally, comments may be > > sent to iesg@ietf.org 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. > >
- Your comments on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.txt Adrian Farrel
- Re: Your comments on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-15.t… Abdussalam Baryun