Re: [manet] #21 (aodvv2): Document hard to read

Hello Henning and all,

I will adjust the text to use "AODVv2 message" instead of "AODVv2 packet"
whenever feasible, or use some other wording if "message" does not fit.

Regards,
Charlie P.

On 4/3/2014 10:57 PM, Henning Rogge wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Abdussalam Baryun
> <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I agree that that terminology can add aodvv2 packet definition but not
>> needed.  The draft to use IP packet and aodvv2 packet if needed. My
>> understanding is that all packets in the draft are RFC5444 packets or aodvv2
>> packets, and only if said IP packet. I think this was the method done in
>> olsrv2 draft too.
> If you take the protocol multiplexing capabilities of RFC5444 serious
> there is no such thing as a "AODVv2 packet"... there are "AODVv2
> messages" and "RFC5444 packets", which may contain messages from
> multiple protocols (e.g. AODVv2 and NHDP messages in the same packet).
>
> Henning Rogge
>
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> manet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>

-- 
Regards,
Charlie P.