Re: [OSPF] Single Hop MANET versus Broadcast/P2MP Hybrid Interface

1. Yes.

2. Yes, but...IMHO we don't need a full refresh of the RFCs.  An ID updating the RFC should be enough.  The ID should be Experimental (just like the RFC).

Alvaro.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ospf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Acee Lindem
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 6:22 PM
> To: OSPF List
> Subject: [OSPF] Single Hop MANET versus Broadcast/P2MP Hybrid Interface
> 
> Speaking as WG Co-Chair,
> 
> As many of you remember, we spent a lot of WG time 2004-2007 discussing
> various OSPF MANET solutions. We were unable to converge on a single
> solution and ended up with 3 experimental RFCs. It was thought that
> possibly one day a clear winner would emerge and become a standard.
> While this may still happen in the future, I don't believe we are there
> yet and do not feel it would be beneficial to renew the debate.
> 
> In Beijing, the hybrid broadcast/P2MP interface was proposed with a
> radio networks being one of the target environment. This collision with
> the former work on OSPF MANET elicited much discussion. In Prague, the
> chairs, authors, and some other interested parties met to specifically
> address this collision. What we agreed was that the existing OSPF MANET
> RFCs were the agreed upon solution(s) for MANET environments. The OSPF
> hybrid interface could still be valuable as a simple adjacency
> reduction technique on links where broadcast capability was available
> but not all the links had the same costs. We also agreed that the OSPF
> MANET mechanisms (with some simplifications) could also handle the
> single hop case.
> 
> Hence, the questions for the WG are:
> 
> 
>   1. Do we want to accept draft-nsheth-ospf-hybrid-bcast-and-p2mp-
> 01.txt as a WG document?
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nsheth-ospf-hybrid-bcast-and-
> p2mp
> 
>   2. Do we wish to allow revisions of the OSPF MANET experimental RFCs
> to cover the single-hop case (and possibly minor corrections)?
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5449/
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5614/
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5820/
> 
> Note that IPR statements are filed for some of the above.
> 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf