Re: [manet] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multitopology-05: (with DISCUSS)

[Henning Rogge <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Susan Hares <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Let's go to the higher level purpose rather than the "not my WG charter"
> reasoning.
>
>
>
> If you are running an experiment with this protocol, you need to have
> specific details enough to determine if this experimental protocol is a
> success.  Otherwise, you will continue to have the OLSR vs. AODV-v2, or
> vague review on RFC5444 additions to the protocol.  This ends up in
> emotional debate without substantial experimental results to back it up.
> Emotional debates recycle. My suggestions aim at providing enough detail to
> settle these arguments with experimental results.  MANET has lots of
> exciting work to do in the advent of 5G, 802.11ac, and other  mobile network
> changes.

We (Fraunhofer FKIE) need multitopology for our heterogeneous
networks... what use is it to talk about "good routing metric" if your
video traffic is put onto the VHF link with 20 kBit/s? Different
service classes have different needs... and some network/radio
technologies would only serve a sub-group of them. Thats why I
implemented the multitopology draft while it was in an early draft
state.

Henning Rogge