Re: [manet] Recharter proposal draft (was Re: Poll for virtual interim meeting in the week of September 25th)

"Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't" <> Tue, 12 September 2023 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35036C1519B5 for <>; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 09:32:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.107
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MUiCPLZzLnMu for <>; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 09:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A35DC15153C for <>; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 09:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; l=22693; s=mta1; t=1694536318; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=sGu23MqGbTHtxwrhkJQ++MbgPgPllI9Yp4A5iVyfhGM=; b=HEDyE1MkdbX9pO/h/CfU0S8M7XzBBA7a5FPUw3sm1UJjRZx0dKg6M0F/ HkkXvdEBfR2Tuerqgj96najHp/8PysL9ZZhp5M8zS3CLguV2hXp2OfrYJ fsbl2QGUGF2VRJhHTl8OslbvSTTOpT0S2fkDkdZwgzy9ojcr7bUlSPH0W s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.02,139,1688421600"; d="p7s'?scan'208,217";a="79979877"
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.31; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:31:55 +0200
Received: from ([fe80::f0be:da35:60c4:811]) by ([fe80::f0be:da35:60c4:811%3]) with mapi id 15.01.2507.031; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:31:55 +0200
From: "Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't" <>
To: Abdussalam Baryun <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: Recharter proposal draft (was Re: [manet] Poll for virtual interim meeting in the week of September 25th)
Thread-Index: AQHZ4n1bbp0VM6Y/p0O7GUgbJpD3zbAXXY+Q
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:31:55 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, nl-NL
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
x-originating-ip: []
x-esetresult: clean, is OK
x-esetid: 37303A2905AA765C6D7667
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg="SHA1"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004B_01D9E5A7.66FD8490"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [manet] Recharter proposal draft (was Re: Poll for virtual interim meeting in the week of September 25th)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:32:04 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,


Hi Ronald,


I think if there is a *recharter proposal* prepared by WG chair/participant as a start, so we can discuss on the list before virtual_meeting, so it will help in the meeting discussion. 


Yes, that can certainly help. I intend to post a “strawman” charter text before the meeting. It cannot be more than that until we decide on the Work Items to take on. (Obviously, “Maintenance and Extensions of {OLSRv2, Babel, DLEP}” can already be added).


Or I think may be it was already discussed before but not summarised as proposal_draft. However, 


My interest is to add to the new proposal charter:


- Informational - (updates RFC2501) MANET use cases ( includes RFCs of the WG as DLEP and OLSRv2 use_cases and includes MANET use within 5G mobile applications).


- Standard - MANET Reactive Routing protocol

- Standard - MANET Multicast Routing protocol

- Experimental - MANET Hybrid Routing protocol


In my view, the most important criterion for deciding whether or not to add specific Work Items to the charter needs to be: Are there WG participants who are actually “ready, willing & able” to perform the work required? Perhaps you can indicate, for the potential Work Items you mention above, to which ones you would like to actively contribute.





Best wishes,



On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 4:47 PM Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't < <> > wrote:



The WG chairs are setting up a Virtual Interim Meeting to discuss and hopefully reach some degree of consensus on Work Items for a new WG Charter. We picked the week beginning on September 25th for this meeting, but have not yet decided on a day in that week. We would like to have as many WG members participating as possible. To that end, we are requesting you to indicate your availability through this poll: 




Note that the starting time is the same for each day: 13:00 UTC / 9:00 AM EDT / 2:00 PM BST / 15:00 CEST. (The time indicated on the form is to be interpreted as UTC). We intend to request a 1 ½ hour slot, hoping to end early.



Swift responses would be highly appreciated!



On behalf of the MANET WG chairs,


manet mailing list <>