Re: MANET Extensions to OSPF

Acee Lindem <acee@REDBACK.COM> Tue, 25 May 2004 20:28 UTC

References: <020f01c42c65$c8d8ffc0$0202a8c0@aceeinspiron> <Pine.OSX.4.58.0405241452350.1499@eth-0-3-93-c4-40-3a.dhcp.nanog31.merit.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <035e01c44296$d2d81280$0302a8c0@aceeinspiron>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 16:28:21 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Acee Lindem <acee@REDBACK.COM>
Subject: Re: MANET Extensions to OSPF
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ White" <ruwhite@CISCO.COM>
To: <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: MANET Extensions to OSPF


> >    6. Where both IPR and non-IPR encumbered mechanisms are proposed,
> >       the WG will analyze the technical merits and will try to prefer
> >       unencumbered technology without making technical sacrificies.
>
> I would guess that most of the technical solutions available are going to
> be IPR'd by the parties involved.

There are already a plethora of Manet routing protocols. Perhaps some of
the mechanisms in these can be applied.

> As long as the terms of the IPR's
> involved are "liberal," and acceptable by all the members of the WG, then
> we should consider the best technical solution first.


>
> :-)
>
> Russ
>
> __________________________________
> riw@cisco.com CCIE <>< Grace Alone

Re: MANET Extensions to OSPF Russ White
Re: MANET Extensions to OSPF Acee Lindem