[manet] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-band-00
Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com> Mon, 05 August 2024 06:59 UTC
Return-Path: <hrogge@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 27D37C14F6FB for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:59:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hy1zj8MVEMQ9 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEFC5C14F604 for <manet@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7a975fb47eso1340528066b.3 for <manet@ietf.org>; Sun, 04 Aug 2024 23:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1722841169; x=1723445969; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=wBgRx/67uC2Cja1Z4ODUdbXUdI6CQfL4HRMfXikvSds=; b=FNvm92OUOon+uFNJ0ASVPXUQm9abs6YyXl+Hb8Uy51TDvWYfpfu1n16T+eDyZSb/oT ZY718RpcjSeZEgy99GNrvR3Z1bCW/AqVB9ltn7eam6vGvPkpjCeOc8hUFI6qcaCprTu3 BbpkTxoEXJFWYh9PzIi58+3dkvW+X9K76NBOtfJlZCodAm0DL/ic0s830lzDoIduOxZJ va2e6isuDZGgBFy+a8h3S3qqpcCHwGjg3zJtmEikMe1Q9Okkce2RBIN+bCRI1hpC3JT+ IfR8tXAD/BmCA7OsUX1SjfeEvEXvihRjT+EVW7AuZrXEE3HUqB6rMV7XeP5GpBCBL2o2 w+mQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722841169; x=1723445969; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wBgRx/67uC2Cja1Z4ODUdbXUdI6CQfL4HRMfXikvSds=; b=rRymIUD3XeH6velqbih4V7VMeyDUTzglhowFQc+Gnt0NQD28GtHvLIhUUgKm9rQ35m i8LQxiIJvqsLC1dHMnjvQ1HBQUrdr9AlI7ER0rn5wNFtKAFLB4p1zENzVlw/DyAEXu9k Oxi/mQbK4X/yv1XUcx322AC71+CF4rYLQZW5o7VBcwFNME55tXNJCLCl/pkCljeWc4VT 8gIpX5TZxmzZrghjn8jbKyns62UT1loul80krBD6iaQs7Ue2RURT0qPpUTQO6jeVPv2o 4dONcjZMhThLH7lCTXDXtQWX8l8F+X+Jsl7vIlw+AuSoXatbY8yVS93i9ay9t8U42MEy u4Pw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyNVJvHZ6O6W23AHKIU0+VgT+RXb148OqzA+mpg/FPBMTORw9lU 7Z5OQ55RDLSnPDofAk1XdWw+YUochcaxqWdc3wX9x5+vTUj3ebVrAfb34xhy3t7IyE0cW+r7WLl K0a5ZEEDnwhjmLq5AWgFNi0NFIZDDuA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGWCNrymNOOH8SIAKBOdmqwMf88jI4GTBb8EYnoYr+tZ0ORb07W94J1iMiYp9kjpyNb7nRr6K07SvSLmiViHs4=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:72d2:b0:a7a:9f0f:ab2c with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7dc4e66c91mr739194166b.29.1722841168371; Sun, 04 Aug 2024 23:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <PH7PR14MB5368E229D0A5D5A6DB1BD055BBAB2@PH7PR14MB5368.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <PH7PR14MB5368E229D0A5D5A6DB1BD055BBAB2@PH7PR14MB5368.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
From: Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 09:00:24 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGnRvuoQtSk3e3C98ekj2ZvSsrXcRf-LnLWfP65hYYVAEzisnw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Don Fedyk <dfedyk@labn.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: 5MZSFV7W7T7YIJJI4NNHPEI4RKPTVMXN
X-Message-ID-Hash: 5MZSFV7W7T7YIJJI4NNHPEI4RKPTVMXN
X-MailFrom: hrogge@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-manet.ietf.org-0; header-match-manet.ietf.org-1; header-match-manet.ietf.org-2; header-match-manet.ietf.org-3; header-match-manet.ietf.org-4; header-match-manet.ietf.org-5; header-match-manet.ietf.org-6; header-match-manet.ietf.org-7; header-match-manet.ietf.org-8; header-match-manet.ietf.org-9; header-match-manet.ietf.org-10; header-match-manet.ietf.org-11; header-match-manet.ietf.org-12; header-match-manet.ietf.org-13; header-match-manet.ietf.org-14; header-match-manet.ietf.org-15; header-match-manet.ietf.org-16; header-match-manet.ietf.org-17; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [manet] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-band-00
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/_zvD4V9SZaDJZtpzx4SmUX5m45Q>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:manet-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:manet-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:manet-leave@ietf.org>
On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 1:30 AM Don Fedyk <dfedyk@labn.net> wrote: > > Hi Henning > > I reviewed this draft. My main comments. > > I got lost on the description of center frequence and carrier frequency both terms are used once. The description of the extension TLV needs to match the text in the TLV. Okay, have to fix this... > The bandwidth element is missing a description. What are the units bits/sec ? Bandwidth is measured in Hz... standard Wifi-channel has 20MHz bandwidth (as an example). > The use of uplink and downlink terminology versus Transmit and receive. Why not just use Transmit and Receive everywhere? From link interface that seems less confusing ? Have to think about this, most likely you are right. > Also, In my opinion this draft could do with a small example appendix. I’m guessing a simple radio for a single link would have two TLVs, one for each the transmit and receive direction. Each TLV would have a different frequency but comparable bandwidths? Is that how a symmetric link would look? Or are many TLVs with different frequencies in the same direction typical for even the most basic link? The most basic MANET link would have a single TLV with both the tx and rx bit set, because most MANET link use the same frequency range for sending or receiving data over the air. I will work on a new revision of the draft this week. Henning Rogge
- [manet] Comments on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-radio-b… Don Fedyk
- [manet] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-rad… Henning Rogge