IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [manet] New DLEP extension draft for WG

Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com> Mon, 01 February 2021 11:17 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 776193A0DCC for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 03:17:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 PGp_Kap3n7xc for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 03:17:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (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 C4ADF3A0DC2 for <manet@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 03:17:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id s18so19084672ljg.7 for <manet@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 03:17:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CKX/08dbwIN6iDyv8ohAGwH7DjhQbQ6b3WP89IRM2qE=; b=N76fZvVsq0mP73kUIwyAbFIb5qRVPTkfe4CJSqUWbVhlRJbuyWh5ifUccPSnLHiZUK uUfri2DhJ8jIa8yM4S9R4DDuxYrpG0UTKdRaspErjHSXkEiOJUPO2Z0DE6esm7bo7Pof zjuj6UgsBRXhUKiMwIYRfmRjqLyGe9BcQxI+NsgVp45ObEguq3/yjGH6lUrhdL4Natu0 IdS2piTkxWQcrKCwz5ayRFpgj9kdjhOMPrNUJVaYBw22sVx4r4tpol17xcVb5sIjuh8Z NfT1cHgvIneRaDU/M1Ee1cq0q67bXty8vpAF3yFdI6sR9Ww34DmHcq5/2GhEK9XL1Twq GUhQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CKX/08dbwIN6iDyv8ohAGwH7DjhQbQ6b3WP89IRM2qE=; b=CQQWrAjFzw1lapSHXGXHIcQujpDcIBUdEwyLsC8/VwGXxcxOd0JgIBhGt1nHtPxh+7 ooQsJJ4smGyoT7hxIU7G7qOaYl5Vd3LIdl4CajUJJHHM7ocPp6EZoWE6W3OlXSU1UTg8 6ezSuJvhYzlHz1/kZcuqr2vbThQuHZWtnHBydunmxp7xVOkYtDuiLqX81oQFFYf8jhk0 J+d0vIRmyfggut9BBRUFxem0B+R436FsACUQTa5NcaeDUZ7jLYCUwW4Z+n2MiO4eyTbc AROoNePQM8tPbsrQh90yvrUJfOD6UalPJw0kwY6e+rGyFvEMkXGiD/nwlzVs6kMuABuW OhIA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ceNmfNY7R/ncgSoZvhN7dUZgQ/R8yzLvH0YTLLZMjKoqcqbRf j3A0FKcy7jxvKOfFyjKeBV9Y29PNLD0e/aT2Fkk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzI+TTCuVOnqdvBY8TbzwGL2JD1RDMT9L89d3cvgx8VzKvEIlcJGjDXYVRuUBEwvItVvylIX03WZ7/zvuMu/as=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:282:: with SMTP id b2mr10081683ljo.52.1612178263098; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 03:17:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1611754401862.43329@fkie.fraunhofer.de> <a5e950b6c4ae0e0efb11d75ee748737bb4a59a30.camel@tropicalstormsoftware.com> <CAGnRvuoR8=sVjmwok-3SGrujULiBVMiDkp7d=HE-F7wejFWegw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGnRvuoNG62ycPQPaGH0f1W_yhfS0H-rE_KfpMD3=dfqeHvAYA@mail.gmail.com> <1611860125.2483.28.camel@gmail.com> <CAGnRvuoCZELvPO3uMdTqKJZ+kbngcSHY+gzu9JwJ4wJNM1VYqA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGnRvuocf5dr8GU0D1NUUVda3daqj=eWsqMsXKosuRt5xnQXMQ@mail.gmail.com> <2d290599a6944b5b9029d2dc3fd6ccb7@tno.nl>
In-Reply-To: <2d290599a6944b5b9029d2dc3fd6ccb7@tno.nl>
From: Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 12:17:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGnRvupf2uF7-2c4Lq99uctFca3=8aP0on_5gtn0MLYf5CGAoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't" <Ronald.intVelt@tno.nl>
Cc: MANET IETF <manet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000afc9e805ba44803e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/bTSR6Y54Ae_vLCmF-D-qOH6X2gk>
Subject: Re: [manet] New DLEP extension draft for WG
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: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 11:17:46 -0000

On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 11:49 AM Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't <
Ronald.intVelt@tno.nl> wrote:

> The 'radio bands' I-D that you submitted last week has narrow scope
> indeed. Continuing in this way, we will have two more similarly scoped
> physical layer oriented drafts and a couple(?) of MAC layer oriented ones.
> Maybe aggregating them into one document per layer is not a bad idea after
> all. (Yes, I am changing my mind). For now, I would keep them as different
> extensions. Rick makes a valid point, that you are then faced with the
> question what it means to say "this DLEP implementation supports RFC
> 9nnn".  Which parts are mandatory and which are optional?
>

I think I have a good picture about this for the "channel utilization"
extension but not the one for signal strength...

because some hardware say "we know signal strength", some say "we know SNR"
and some (I think) RSSI...

making any one of them mandatory is not helpful if your hardware only
supports one of the other options.


> Please post what you have in whichever form you prefer (aggregated or
> split out), so we can get a discussion started on the list now.


I will post two more draft documents, we can discuss if we want to join
them easily.

Henning

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email