Re: [manet] AODVv2 implementation

Charlie Perkins <> Fri, 02 February 2024 21:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56758C14F61C for <>; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:52:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.243
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.243 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, 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 fj2FIxRD0fmb for <>; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:51:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (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 E726CC14F5E8 for <>; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:51:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; bh=J0CWYkVZnIGecgAcgac6yX3ksJWRXthpdcEKBw UCY6o=; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from:reply-to:subject: date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-cc:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post: list-owner:list-archive; q=dns/txt; s=dk12062016; t=1706910716; x=1707515516; b=J0+Q04Aqwycfx4bofTTmFJZuBWQGIYD2WSz4d/LDz+pQikvaNLsx1Ux yqA7W2y9OKNjr96US/Z9UR3KVnYZAC2sIAQLO6L24Dt/DLtNh99oYr4eO6ce/8ZFxwlc3MK DUZKPO1jZ9FbdPLONEsKZfnhqeexmzAXgNGN/vIbAcH08aJ+lVlXepghelZmN7F2J1n+HND p8HwgaRpoTevdR6IqJKddxyQUG/JRfP1ksJeYMdA7QBA35kauecKnho0aItTfOda/GZoV5W dQ3kelFRDV7o/FMUkkeXg0iwHFr19kymSxtFI6vnjtAM7wUlm8iYB0xSGKzhhe+iBTX9ZPP atA==
Authentication-Results:; auth=pass;
Received: from [] ([]) by with ngmta id 4fa2f4e6-17b02a409372ca70; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 21:51:56 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------sDYRCcFe3isuLorxgxAYh2Tq"
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:51:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Henning Rogge <>
Cc: "" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Charlie Perkins <>
Organization: Blue Sky Meadows
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 16:16:55 -0800
Subject: Re: [manet] AODVv2 implementation
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, 02 Feb 2024 21:52:05 -0000

Hello Henning and all,

Please excuse my long delay in answering emails on this topic. Follow-up 
> Hi Juliusz, hi Charlie,
> I would not say that AODV (v1 or v2) is impossible to implement (some
> people have done it), but it's much harder to do on most general
> purpose operation systems than OLSR(v1 or v2) because of its necessary
> interaction with the forwarding plane.

AODV is an on-demand protocol.   A route may not exist when needed for 
an application.  As I understand it, that also means that when such an 
application runs, a route somehow needs to brought into the route 
table.  That has not been a standard feature for the operating systems 
that I am familiar with.  Instead, if a route does not exist when called 
for by the application, it has been considered an error.  So, we made 
the design choice of discovering a route in order to correct the error.

> ....

> ... a running implementation of AODVv2 <is> also the only way to test
> if the metric integration in AODVv2 is working reasonably well,
> because I don't think ANY routing protocol will do us good with
> hop-count metric on any wireless radio that supports multiple data
> rates.

Strong agreement on the unsuitability for hop-count for many systems.  
Section 5 specifies the following:

>    AODVv2 currently supports cost metrics where Cost(R) is strictly 
> increasing ...

The restriction to use of only monotonically increasing metrics goes a 
long way to avoid the introduction of errors in the metric calculations 
(compared to hop count calculation).  For that reason the experience 
with AODV using hop-counts provides some confidence that AODVv2 metric 
evaluation will work.

Also, one last bit of follow-up, out of order:

On 11/26/2023 11:10 PM, Henning Rogge wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 3:32 PM Juliusz Chroboczek<>  wrote:
>> Hi Charlie,
>>> I do not have an implementation.
>> It is my understanding that Henning has concerns about the implementability
>> of AODVv2.  Given Henning's track record, I recommend that we should not
>> dismiss his concerns.

It should go without saying, but I certainly never intended to dismiss 
Henning's concerns.

Charlie P.