Re: [OSPF] IETF 67 OSPF WG Meeting minutes - Correct file appended

Richard Ogier <> Mon, 13 November 2006 16:35 UTC

Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gjelw-0006up-QR; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:35:00 -0500
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gjelv-0006uh-Ec for; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:34:59 -0500
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gjelr-0002u5-6v for; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:34:59 -0500
Received: from ([] by with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1Gjelo-00006H-00; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:34:53 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:34:50 -0800
From: Richard Ogier <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 (emach0202)
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Acee Lindem <>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] IETF 67 OSPF WG Meeting minutes - Correct file appended
References: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081
Cc: OSPF List <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>

>      Acee: Show hands on what should be done:
>            - Quit working on OSPF MANET: none
>            - Continue to drive to consensus: none
>            - Refine drafts and publish as experimental: 2/3's of people
>              in room. To be validated on list.


Correct me if I am wrong, but since the latest version of INRIA's
draft was available only last week, and since previous versions did
not fully specify the protocol (as pointed out by Phil Spagnolo in
his 9/28/06 post to the ospf-manet list), it has not yet been decided
that INRIA's draft will be published as experimental.

Moreover, since INRIA has not participated in the GTNetS simulation
comparison that Boeing has been conducting for the last two
years, in which the MDR draft has been compared to Cisco's
OR/SP drafts (results can be found at Boeing's OSPF-MANET website ),
it is only fair that we should do such a comparison with INRIA's draft
before deciding to publish it as experimental.

In fact, that has been the plan since the Dallas IETF meeting in March,
and Philippe agreed to this in his message of 4/5/06:

Philippe Jacquet wrote on 4/5/06:
 > Yes it would be great to synchronize our efforts on GTNet.
 > Let's see how to proceed.

Now, 7 months later, INRIA has implemented their solution in GTNetS,
so the next step would be for Boeing to work with INRIA to make
sure the code is debugged and implemented in a manner that allows
a fair comparison, just as Boeing has done with the OR/SP and
MDR solutions over the last two years.  Hopefully, this work can
be completed by the next IETF meeting.

I think it is reasonable and fair to require such a comparison
to be done before INRIA's draft is accepted, especially
since they promised to synchronize efforts 7 months ago.
Let me know if you agree or disagree.
IMO, to give INRIA a free pass and avoid such a comparison
would be unfair to those of us who worked hard for the last two
years on the GTNetS simulation effort.


OSPF mailing list