Re: [Manet-dt] Possible Group Pow-wow Monday Afternoon or Evening.

["Ian Chakeres" <[e-mail]>]

I arrive on Monday at 3pm (time change kills the travel time), so I
would prefer Monday evening.

In order to avoid conflict, how about 8pm Monday? If this time does
not work for someone interested in attending please let Joe & I know.
Otherwise, mark your calendar.

Ian

On 3/1/06, Joe Macker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I would like to sit down with manet design team participants prior to MANET
> on Tuesday.
> Any interest in sometime Monday afternoon or evening?
>  - I may not arrive until Monday but will likely stay through Thrusday for
> autoconf.
>
> Ian and I will likely provide a brief RTG area report. There are several RTG
> area sessions so its hard to predict right which one. I want to plant the
> seed on peoples calendars early.
>
> -Joe
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: [e-mail]
> >[mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Ian Chakeres
> >Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:12 AM
> >To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> >Cc: [e-mail]; Thomas Clausen
> >Subject: Re: [Manet-dt] Generalised OLSR packet/message format
> >comments -msg-semantics
> >
> >My opinion is that several msg-types might have benefit from
> >using a few bits in the fixed portion for their specific use.
> >I don't think this goes against the common format philosophy.
> >Perhaps, the msg-semantics could be broken into 4 bits for
> >msg-semantics and 4 bits for msg-type-specific bits.
> >
> >I am just proposing the idea. Would any of the OLSRv2 packets
> >benefit from having a few bits specific and available to it?
> >
> >Ian
> >
> >On 2/1/06, Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> ><[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > One last comment. I would like to see several of the msg-semantic
> >> > bits reserved for msg-type specific bits. 4 ideally, but I would
> >> > probably settle for 2. For example in DYMO, RREQ messages
> >could use
> >> > a few of these bits for its own purpose.
> >>
> >> I think this is exactly contrary to the common format
> >philosophy (see
> >> my last message) and is not a good idea. If an RREQ needs RREQ
> >> specific information, the place for that is a message TLV.
> >>
> >>
> >> ********************************************************************
> >> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> >> recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> >> recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> >> You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
> >> distribute its contents to any other person.
> >> ********************************************************************
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Manet-dt mailing list
> >[e-mail]
> >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Manet-dt mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
>

_______________________________________________
Manet-dt mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt