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

On Oct 13, 2012, at 23:18 , Henning Rogge <hrogge@googlemail.com> 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. 

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.

I don't know if one "best way of calculating ETX" exists -- I do know that there's a saying that can be adapted to be appropriate here: "Best is the enemy of good".

Thomas

> Henning Rogge
> 
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Ulrich Herberg <ulrich@herberg.name> wrote:
>> I think this draft is indeed interesting, and I wonder if there is any work
>> planned to continue it. It seems to be a bit of a mixture between specifying
>> how to use ETX in OLSRv2, and a deployment experience of ETX with OLSR in
>> the FunkFeuer network. Is that the right way to go forward, or should that
>> not better be separated in two drafts?
>> 
>> Ulrich
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Abdussalam Baryun
>> <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I think some people in WG are interested also in Funkfeuer routing
>>> metric [1], it was mentioned in MANET meeting 84. I hope we will see
>>> the draft [2] to be accepted as a MANET WG draft shortly for
>>> informational about Funkfeuer.
>>> 
>>> AB>suggest for title>
>>> Packet Sequence Number based ETX Metric for Funkfeuer  Networking.
>>> 
>>> AB> suggest the Abstract>
>>> This document specifies the ETX metric and its usage in Funkfeuer's
>>> OLSRv2 Routers.
>>> 
>>> I recommend to include this draft [2] or a renewal in the Agenda 85,
>>> if the authors are welling to present it.
>>> 
>>> [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg12077.html
>>> [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-funkfeuer-manet-olsrv2-etx-01
>>> 
>>> AB
>>> ++
>>> On 10/12/12, Henning Rogge <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>>>> On 10/12/2012 09:53 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is an excellent draft/work, I support the draft and your process.
>>>>> Thanks to all: authors, you and the WG,
>>>> 
>>>> The document will be a great help as a pointer for people who still
>>>> arguing the use of link metrics. Good to see it here.
>>>> 
>>>> Henning Rogge
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut für
>>>> Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE
>>>> Kommunikationssysteme (KOM)
>>>> Fraunhofer Straße 20, 53343 Wachtberg, Germany
>>>> Telefon +49 228 9435-961,   Fax +49 228 9435 685
>>>> mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> manet mailing list
>>> manet@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> manet mailing list
>> manet@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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."
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> manet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet