Re: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments
"Ian Chakeres" <ian.chakeres@gmail.com> Tue, 18 April 2006 15:45 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1FVsOi-0006AO-Kl; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:45:48 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FVsOh-0006AJ-Iu
for manet-dt@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:45:47 -0400
Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.198])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FVsOf-0005va-Ar
for manet-dt@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:45:47 -0400
Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id x3so760107nzd
for <manet-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
b=qQOFhnF7JOWZoBV00vg0qu7tDtinauIuc33K1uz6t/5BX+VSwwMkn6EpAm4HbWcF+mq2UmzGaPpNnD9vR0NXB0s3PuOJ+JCfzMODC6ijIDzrpWAFHjWb4SMRjD7v5kX5Y5Z+1iBfaqZmmCTX3Eij1Ex0498x789HtDGWnRPSfPg=
Received: by 10.36.138.13 with SMTP id l13mr811047nzd;
Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.37.18.44 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <374005f30604180845m3be4dcdcm23cd398a2ac41471@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:45:44 -0700
From: "Ian Chakeres" <ian.chakeres@gmail.com>
To: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
Subject: Re: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments
In-Reply-To: <C1DE3C7469FE5A4D95F9BF0F332D8B8D02263E8A@glkms0008>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <C1DE3C7469FE5A4D95F9BF0F332D8B8D02263E8A@glkms0008>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c
Cc: manet-dt@ietf.org, Thomas Clausen <T.Clausen@computer.org>
X-BeenThere: manet-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: MANET Design Team <manet-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt>,
<mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/manet-dt>
List-Post: <mailto:manet-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt>,
<mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: manet-dt-bounces@ietf.org
Name = NHDBB - Seems like NHD is an agreed upon acronym and BB is our acronym for common building blocks. It ain't pretty, but it is there. HELLO - If people like HELLO, I can learn to like it. MIN_INTERVAL - Chris has given me the freedom to set MIN_INTERVAL arbitrarily small. So I'm ok with MUST. Is removing the 2-hop (limiting) statement important to anyone? Ian On 4/18/06, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com> wrote: > > Thomas > > I feel that having an upper limit on the control traffic, which a > given > > protocol is able to generate, is very useful. Without restricting the > > interval between subsequent transmissions of HELLO messages, I could > > easily envision an implementation which would NOT be doing the right > > thing and end up eating all available bandwidth in a region. > > Agreed so far. > > > however I strongly believe that such MUST be imposed as a MUST. > > That doesn't totally convince me that SHOULD isn't acceptable. SHOULD > does after all mean something stronger than just "if you feel like it". > > However in one sense the argument is academic. A node may have a > minimum interval, and it may absolutely respect it. But if we allow > a node to set its own values (as discussed elsewhere) then the node > could set that interval to zero (or if zero isn't allowed, as close > to zero as makes no difference). And I can't see that we have the > knowledge to provide absolute constraints on the minimum interval. > > On that basis, I'm happy with MUST, as (assuming that a node's > parameters must be available in some sense - device documentation > for example if fixed) this gets most of the best of the two > (MUST/SHOULD) options. > > > ******************************************************************** > 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 Manet-dt@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
- [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Ian Chakeres
- RE: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Thomas Clausen
- RE: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Ian Chakeres
- Re: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Samita Chakrabarti
- RE: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: [Manet-dt] OLSRv2 NHDP comments Samita Chakrabarti