[manet] Re: manet autoconf (was Re: Re: Call for Presentations)

["Templin (US), Fred L" <[e-mail]>]

Yes, this work is a couple of decades old now but still relevant today. What the work did
not consider was that there are several distinct types of addresses needed – MANET-local
(aka Multilink-local) Addresses (MLAs), Internetworking addresses including Global Unicast
(GUAs) and Unique Local (ULAs) and finally Link-Local Addresses (LLAs).

The working group charter and draft you cited below seem to focus on obtaining MLAs
from some central authority for the MANET with the understanding that the MLAs could
also serve as GUAs. ‘draft-templin-6man-omni3’ and ‘draft-templin-6man-aero3’ assume
that MANET nodes will either have pre-configured MLAs pre-assigned by some central
authority prior to engaging in the MANET routing protocol or that the nodes will simply
self-generate an MLA that is highly likely to be unique (i.e., “zeroconf”). But, as a second
step, the drafts are in agreement with the old autoconf wg charter [1] claiming that the
DHCPv6 service should be used to obtain Internetworking addresses.

The real-life MANETs I care about are ones in which a collection of MANET routers
comes together in a local operating area where there may be intermittent or
continuous connectivity to the Internet through one or more proxys/gateways
or perhaps even no Internet connectivity at all. In all cases, the MANET routers
should operate the routing protocol using MLA addresses which can also be used
for multihop forwarding within the MANET in the data plane.

When there is some form of Internet connectivity, the MANET routers should then
autoconfigure Internetworking addresses to support Internet communications
necessary to reach peer nodes outside of the local MANET. DHCPv6 still provides
a suitable service for that.

Thank you - Fred

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2024 12:48 AM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: manet autoconf (was Re: [manet] Re: Call for Presentations)

Also, IMHO we should not ignore the work done before or why was not success in all_milestones, so we need to comment_on/check/review the WG [1] created by manet-wg, and last draft [2] in this topic,

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/autoconf/about/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-perkins-manet-autoconf-01

best regards,

AB


On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 3:46 PM Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Thank you for your support – this is an important topic.

Fred

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2024 12:35 AM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: manet autoconf (was Re: [manet] Re: Call for Presentations)


Hi Fred,

I agree, I was not involved because it was before I joined and when I joined there was no interest to continue.

I support that we need this topic to be discussed as well,

thanks,
AB

On Wed, Oct 2, 2024 at 11:47 PM Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Thanks for this guidance and perspective, Don. To start the discussion, who here remembers
about the IETF autoconf working group and what they were trying to accomplish? That group
had high aspirations about Internetworking for MANETs, but following the publication of
RFC5889 the group decided to shut down and declare success. But, RFC5889 was far from
a definitive spec on MANET Internetworking and at best provides only a framework sketch.

Some of us who were involved in the autoconf studies kept moving the work forward even
though the community itself had dried up. It took many years of work to bring these specs
to a suitable level of maturity, but I can now offer the AERO/OMNI solution for MANET
Internetworking:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-6man-aero3/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-6man-omni3/

We are specifically looking at applying AERO/OMNI to 5G MANET Internetworking for
nodes that occasionally or even frequently operate outside the context of operator
network infrastructure. We are beginning to publish IEEE documents about this
through a university research study program we have in place with Virginia Tech.

It is strange to see that there is so little other work going on in this area in the
modern era when there was so much in prior years. Either MANET is dead, or
it is in need of a spark to wake it back up again. I hope it is the latter, and I hope
this message thread might provide a such a spark.

Thank you for your thoughts,

Fred Templin

From: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2024 2:15 PM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Call for Presentations

EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments.


We are trying to figure out our charter going forward. There has not been much activity at all since the group has slowly recovered from loss of some key personal.   Chairs alone do not set the charter -  it is work group participants. Since you have drafts already  you are welcome to propose that you could talk about the drafts on the MANET list and see what interest you get.   It is a small group so any interested is probably a good indication.

Thanks
Don




From: Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 5:09 PM
To: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Call for Presentations

Thanks Don; I have two very mature drafts that tell unambiguously how to operate MANETs that
have intermittent or continuous connectivity to the Internet. Do people in this group want to hear
about those, or is there simply no interest in MANET Internetworking?

Thank you - Fred

From: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2024 2:04 PM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Call for Presentations

Hi Fred

This sounds like a topic that would be good to start a discussion on the list or write  a draft and follow up presentation to the group.

Thanks,
Don

From: Templin (US), Fred L <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 4:50 PM
To: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Call for Presentations

Don, I would offer a presentation but this community seems to have somehow forgotten about
Internetworking considerations for MANETs. Operation of MANETs in isolation is a good study
and has requirements on the routing protocols and an obvious interaction with DLEP; but the
means for connecting MANETs up to the global Internet and/or private Internetworks somehow
does not seem to be capturing anyone’s interest. This seems strange to me because this is an
*Internet* Engineering Task Force (IETF) group – not an isolated network group. Have we
collectively somehow forgotten that?

Thank you - Fred

From: Don Fedyk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2024 1:39 PM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: [manet] Call for Presentations

Hi

We have requested a 1-hour MANET slot in Dublin . If you would like to present, please send mail to the [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> list or to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>.

Thanks
Don, Ronald, Donald
_______________________________________________
manet mailing list -- [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>