Re: [manet] MANET protocols in the community network as Funkfeuer.

[Henning Rogge <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Thomas Heide Clausen
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 13, 2012, at 23:18 , Henning Rogge <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Interesting question... the last time we worked on the draft the
>> discussion bogged down with the question if this is the "right way" to
>> do ETX.
>>
>> Maybe a split would be a good idea, we could have an informal document
>> specifying the strategy we are using at Freifunk/Funkfeuer for ETX.
>> And then we could work on how to transform this into a good OLSRv2
>> metric.
>>
>
> I do not know if a split is the right thing to do - then again, I do not know that it isn't either.

Maybe instead of splitting it into two Drafts, splitting the draft
into two parts... one explaining what is used in the
Freifunk/Funkfeuer networks currently and another one that suggests a
way to use this strategy for OLSRv2 metrics.

> I think that what the previous version of the I-D failed to do, and what caused the bogged-down discussion, was to frame properly what the content was about.
>
> I think that producing an informational RFC saying something of the kind:
>
>         "This is one way of doing ETX, specifically the one way that has shown to work
>           well in a large deployment in continuous operation. It is probably not the only way,
>           and perhaps not the best way, of doing ETX, but this is one way that's proven to
>           work well"
>
> Would be quite useful.

Another reason why it bogged down was the introduction of the new TLV
to have a "out-of-band" channel between both end of the link for the
routing metric calculation. The current Freifunk/Funkfeuer metric
cannot be done without one.

Henning Rogge

-- 
Steven Hawkings about cosmic inflation: "An increase of billions of
billions of percent in a tiny fraction of a second. Of course, that
was before the present government."