Re: [manet] New drafts for DLEP layer1 metrics

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Fri, 24 September 2021 06:38 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E213A1A72 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 23:38:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K_8OHEwNs_h2 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 23:38:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA8EB3A1A71 for <manet@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 23:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id i24so8139559wrc.9 for <manet@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 23:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nzm9duWNBOQ3nkSHPQ6zniVcBVthZXghQG5sQOhREXg=; b=WBvGBKyLTWInNRScW8C1aImmzxcptulT+QqIfcTZxfO02OCa/sqAg59gFsISGRs6Ux 3n08Uan0vVSyyKDdFe/Nv8nRA/grHz5ipwQAwIrruv9g6dkilF9VfRIDL/Xc6VByH97j kPs8rCXnk6UOYFUuqlKXsAdtgwgiAuCw8YIqs9L15lgSKPiO5dd5V0dHIiilyRZv4Qeu Y8RP9S8QHIqx3ONgUFKZsBYxgfZuUY4ZtE/WPy1IjGIfVaS3T8ghElmNkOPFBf/giXiV lhlIcEG1J+DSF7jV4qJaBvfwll6nxsSsCrxIdBM9GtQ86JxplcPSMGLyK66qIPIohi+a InQQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nzm9duWNBOQ3nkSHPQ6zniVcBVthZXghQG5sQOhREXg=; b=rOC5LA8jfpkLNeKUHW7c197v9Ud7oamBhR29SCkdzUUUn7FCYMjf9KCO3bfjTVQYqm 2zz6ZRBtV774vbgTQbS3OO6GVVG2I2tk21awiWpmMJHrOsN0fzJkfWhBTAF9WuGr/Re2 38Gtd8cDQEL8gyAOyR10dmqGR58cSKis/PCIlfaZ0M3wemtx8MFsf+5tM/VVAcIuAM3C 2+I2J8JGnfvLoAU9QE6wvycSQPjumU5WZdtHBCw59VTK7yRUZMtDQqYqKqI9TRNOJG9z kqXGIkG2iMZrR4xdJcYC/fn8LwrsocIONmAsj54MZmhOBdBUrxwmBI68p7iufRNLtACi Pdqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533IoSh8zcu19O1BDZOO9iBldUE/31Xb8f62WsypRSO5wAk0uNh8 xF61ejWu+kz8hdOM96jVba+HEd/w6k4IMbRbX5E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzudmbnPrY7DJQLM/Mi1I4XioKRWuo+LfKXgYBtKl3RC5vzqMR9VS9lG7jm0/2v8pAJC1LhrNLeqift40VEXpU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:154e:: with SMTP id 14mr9249008wry.53.1632465482730; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 23:38:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1628663779653.75584@fkie.fraunhofer.de> <CADnDZ89N7bNDvcqKne0BNPwiHN+tqCLOoapsOyaSFBYRfH4i2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAGnRvup11W4J8=BFDY56cSGmmDT+qQ4ugDBCMPsLrZ+pGDk5Gw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGnRvup11W4J8=BFDY56cSGmmDT+qQ4ugDBCMPsLrZ+pGDk5Gw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 08:29:03 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ89_ouzAugmaO=nR+=PbSv0WWh6EFNsHSXG7OXXmtt41zw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rogge, Henning" <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>, "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000034d05d05ccb7fd34"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/VVVljfGX8u2mawBS8GMOq4XyNoE>
Subject: Re: [manet] New drafts for DLEP layer1 metrics
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 06:38:07 -0000

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 9:12 AM Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 11:19 PM Abdussalam Baryun
> <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I think the most work have to be done for the "BitError" TLV in the
> radio-quality draft... I am still not happy with the encoding but I am not
> quite sure what to do.
> >
> >
> > for the radi-quality-draft ....the error bit-rate not much value only if
> router knows the data rate/speed, which is specified in rfc8175, so I
> suggest  the draft needs to show the importance of this item related to
> data item of speed.
>
> If you look up some technical specification of a digital radio, you
> will (most likely) find tables for each modulation that show the
> correlation between biterror-rate and (necessary) signal-to-noise
> ratio. This means a radio measuring the biterror rate can give you an
> estimate what error-rate you can expect at other modulations.
>

There are some-assumptions (e.g low mobility environment) in all tables. As
usually assumes fixed data-speed and channel-bandwidth, so any increase in
data rate increases bit error rate depending on physical-comm-channel.


> The biterror rate will also make it possible to estimate the different
> frame-error-rates of small and large frames, which could give you a
> more precise way to calculate the link metric for a routing protocol.
>

That should be discussed I think in the draft. Is there a possibility of
error in getting the BER? however, the bit-error rate is not a rate of
time, just number of errors detected per received bits, also the modulated
signal is not in bits but demodulated is in bits. Each channel has a
maximum data rate, getting equal to that speed or less can increase or
reduce bit error rate while fixed modulation, channel, and noise.

For example, if the router finds increase/decrease in error rate without
knowing changes in data speed then it will expect either change in noise or
channel. Therefore, I suggested the knowledge of speed with BER and some
details on ways of estimating BER or frame-error-rate in draft.

Best Regards
AB