Re: [manet] IETF 118 Minutes available

Christopher Dearlove <> Fri, 17 November 2023 20:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 949F3C151983 for <>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:14:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.607
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.607 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, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bOm_I_Pad3YF for <>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:14:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 224D5C151980 for <>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:14:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-407c3adef8eso20902145e9.2 for <>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:14:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20230601; t=1700252079; x=1700856879;; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Uj8S0mx8snRPA0i4nA1F3mhtqw0t1MgPpuKN9ipMzAY=; b=OOlv/f7/BqkvKfLxGnJ/49KlACTjAxBJVayPobvBokqU99EVjzRSCwZCEdsiXkxTmM HnFcYBxoS9WGb95LzuvuxQYKBh8eRiO0g09DWevObB0vPhU8WwDj5Y907LAHXM4aj/ye RVTHIEMG8QFPNcnpCFypW/qfCRDcQp8BVDEG1EXCSSB/u1M6c0aNY2nF2AftXDM8vlhE ZuT0O6TlJQlc2LrIoL1y0wIZHmmgpXA87tQNCLjsAKCk29l8cSrZEbxoJO+3gG9ME94F AiszjQgr0hjdrmvSztzjfa8uTOtzJOf7eMA2fUK2w4gV1v7+gWZa9yZ6fz+susFtGsDz C65g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20230601; t=1700252079; x=1700856879; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Uj8S0mx8snRPA0i4nA1F3mhtqw0t1MgPpuKN9ipMzAY=; b=WSEZTMfJKACGnh5TlgKTqie89OfBXbNRLRhL7io8yPlZ6QaaVnn6v8yG+XxQFLwf6L THAyR0hp9wA5olUJBgiHJjeywLo/b0RKkOT/mLsmpJskiS440a5bg/tNDoyTW5UPf0l7 LRkn6zc+Ty0VTKViFW+GJz1ooUWoqfNiEqq+VxinVof1TwhCb/hA9j8tXLS9rQRlocPI bXbW4VXKFc+eErA3y5ojWBL/qM8THH7hTHl7DW/DIONPFsoIrghAfCSBmoz4vHkN4h7v wgzKPnbzQq8M6lWNk0SeFBxM/A73lRbQk+qQ+qIqUaBdf/VMUkKcpxd6qScX0hOO9rNn oeqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxGMy544cHQtsZZ8nmrxCNyYLVPZuGwr0uvlJUMEnR53NsQwG1l 40yosADkdJ8Iih1zwciNLIKUAb5QpWw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGCGCNCA0oEvoI7WSw4SsNYeUV0eBRo+6ZCO2ii6sYXlObJkN1/h7Ml7T1+I72PkWcauTgAvQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3223:b0:40a:44aa:bf3a with SMTP id r35-20020a05600c322300b0040a44aabf3amr140876wmp.23.1700252078976; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:14:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPSA id p19-20020a05600c05d300b004081a011c0esm8091092wmd.12.2023. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:14:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Christopher Dearlove <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ED5AAB5C-2E28-4906-A2C6-8A7F75343095"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.\))
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 20:14:26 +0000
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [manet] IETF 118 Minutes available
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: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 20:14:41 -0000

Those are different options. At the moment it isn’t - unless has a new identity I’ve missed - a live draft at all. The WG decided to abandon it, but it was later brought back as an individual draft, but even that is now long expired. It could as a first step easily be brought back again as an individual draft. Then there are (at least) two options. One option is that it could become an individual submission RFC, which doesn’t require this WG, but this WG might well be asked for input on it and which might affect its progress to an RFC. The other option is that once there is a draft again, it could be adopted as a WG draft, reversing the previous decision. I have no idea how the chairs, AD and WG would feel about either.

In either case (assuming the WG is consulted for an individual RFC, and definitely if re-adoption by the WG is considered) the previous technical issues would have to be looked at - I don’t know if or how well they were addressed in the last individual draft, and it is suggested that there’s been progress since.

> On 17 Nov 2023, at 19:53, Abdussalam Baryun <> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 8:49 PM Christopher Dearlove < <>> wrote:
>> Link to document? The datatracker shows draft-manet-aodvv2 last version -16 in 2016 and draft-perkins-aodvv2 (not a WG document) last draft -03 in 2019. Are we talking about a new ID or an individual submission RFC or what? It’s not a WG document at this point.
> Yes, IMO it is individual draft now and wg-draft was deleted before, so they need to republish it for the WG and propose review/adoption,=