From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 1 05:36:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05366 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 05:36:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnEx6-00081B-FH for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:35:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i11AZinB030820 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 05:35:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnEx6-000811-9q for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:35:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05355 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 05:35:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnEx2-0006lf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:35:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnEw9-0006g1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:34:46 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnEve-0006aJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:34:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnEvR-0007lS-M4; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:34:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnEvA-0007ji-D5 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:33:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05278 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 05:33:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnEv6-0006Z1-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:33:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnEuF-0006St-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:32:48 -0500 Received: from venus.uos.ac.kr ([203.249.110.25]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnEtZ-0006HH-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 05:32:05 -0500 Received: from LocalHost (blhole.uos.ac.kr [203.249.110.30]) (authenticated bits=0) by venus.uos.ac.kr (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) with ESMTP id i11AVXUb020487 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:31:35 +0900 Message-Id: <200402011031.i11AVXUb020487@venus.uos.ac.kr> From: "Youngmin Kim" To: Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:31:35 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Thread-Index: AcPoqrUNEDLMVn5XQHiaU8o95UcKCQ== Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] ping jitter Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone!! In multi-hop ad-hoc network A-B-C (with manual route setup), I ping from A to C. (intel 2011 WLAN: 802.11b) As shown example below, it doesn't give regular ping replies. Why do these things happen? Could I get papers about this problem? Thanks.... 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=6.94 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=3 ttl=63 time=365 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=4 ttl=63 time=15.6 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=5 ttl=63 time=88.5 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=6 ttl=63 time=21.2 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=7 ttl=63 time=15.1 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=8 ttl=63 time=58.2 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=9 ttl=63 time=17.0 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=10 ttl=63 time=15.0 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=11 ttl=63 time=15.6 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=12 ttl=63 time=11.2 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=13 ttl=63 time=18.1 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=14 ttl=63 time=7.15 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=15 ttl=63 time=103 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=16 ttl=63 time=7.14 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=17 ttl=63 time=7.60 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=18 ttl=63 time=7.45 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=19 ttl=63 time=7.15 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=20 ttl=63 time=72.9 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=21 ttl=63 time=7.19 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=22 ttl=63 time=7.17 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=23 ttl=63 time=9.79 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=24 ttl=63 time=17.8 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=25 ttl=63 time=46.2 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=26 ttl=63 time=61.3 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=27 ttl=63 time=11.4 ms .... 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=111 ttl=63 time=15.8 ms 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=112 ttl=63 time=132 ms --- 11.0.0.3 ping statistics --- 112 packets transmitted, 112 received, 0% packet loss, time 111589ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/39.706/365.377/53.667 ms _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 1 19:43:16 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA20596 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:43:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnSAq-0002rJ-Pd for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 19:42:48 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i120gmRG010985 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:42:48 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnSAq-0002r6-Km for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 19:42:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA20405 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:42:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnSAo-0000b8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 19:42:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnS9O-0000GW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 19:41:19 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnS7R-0007ke-01 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 19:39:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnRt3-0005HD-5U; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 19:24:25 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnKBT-0007tf-Nb for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 11:10:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA03502 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 11:10:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnK3b-0001R2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 11:02:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnK2f-0001MA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 11:01:50 -0500 Received: from web8312.mail.in.yahoo.com ([203.199.122.12]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnK1o-0001CP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 11:00:57 -0500 Message-ID: <20040201160024.58494.qmail@web8312.mail.in.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.11.78.45] by web8312.mail.in.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:24 GMT Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 16:00:24 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?niranjan=20raja?= To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1874585484-1075651224=:52457" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [manet] help in glomosim Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, HTML_70_80,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-1874585484-1075651224=:52457 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, I am doing my project in M-TCP using glomosim. I am analyzing congestion control algorithms used in the M-TCP environment. I have two problems to implement it. 1.how to create a wired part between two base station in glomosim. 2.How and where to modify the congestion control algorithm being used in simulator. For eg. If Reno is used how to change it into Vegas like that.. valuable suggestions are much expected, as early as possible. Regards. Niranjan raja .j Email: niran_345@yahoo.co.in Yahoo! India Mobile: Ringtones, Wallpapers, Picture Messages and more.Download now. --0-1874585484-1075651224=:52457 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi,
   I am doing my project in M-TCP using glomosim. I am analyzing congestion control algorithms used in the M-TCP environment. I have two problems to implement it.
 
   1.how to create a wired part between two base station in glomosim.

   2.How and where  to modify the congestion control algorithm being used in simulator.

      For eg. If Reno is used how to change it into Vegas like that..

   valuable suggestions are much expected, as early as possible.

 Regards.

Niranjan raja .j

 Email: niran_345@yahoo.co.in

Yahoo! India Mobile: Ringtones, Wallpapers, Picture Messages and more. Download now. --0-1874585484-1075651224=:52457-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 1 22:16:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA29837 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 22:16:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnUZL-0005k3-8u for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:16:15 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i123GFNU022065 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 22:16:15 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnUZL-0005jo-46 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:16:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA29794 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 22:16:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnUZH-00056c-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:16:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnUYH-00050a-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:15:10 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnUXJ-0004w9-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:14:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnUXC-0005P1-Hs; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:14:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnUWS-0005OP-RN for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:13:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA29765 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2004 22:13:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnUWP-0004rb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:13:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnUVY-0004nI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:12:21 -0500 Received: from venus.uos.ac.kr ([203.249.110.25]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnUV9-0004h8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:11:55 -0500 Received: from LocalHost (blhole.uos.ac.kr [203.249.110.30]) (authenticated bits=0) by venus.uos.ac.kr (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) with ESMTP id i123BJUb024986 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 12:11:19 +0900 Message-Id: <200402020311.i123BJUb024986@venus.uos.ac.kr> From: "Youngmin Kim" To: Subject: RE: [manet] ping jitter Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 12:11:21 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Thread-Index: AcPpHINvNd9RP//YTzuDMf7eVt30TwAEY96gAAMEHPA= Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hardware : Samsung notebook X10 RAMSIZE : 256MB OS : Redhat 9.0 Wireless LAN : Intel 2011 Wireless LAN (802.11b) Manual route setup This style of linux command : route add 11.0.0.3 gw 10.0.0.1 RTS/CTS I use default value of iwconfig rts option. I don't know default value...^^; ESSID : adhoc (in iwconfig command) Carrier sense area I don't know carrier sense area But I conform that A-B-C network make multi-hop using ping -R command >I think L2 may be congesting, and is retrasnsmitting. How can I know that L2 is congesting and L2 is retransmitting? There is other 802.11 traffic (ESSID 101, NESPOT...) Does it affect this test? > The jitter might even be traceable to operating system multitask jitter. > What other processes are open and consuming CPU cycles? More detail... please...^^; Thanks... > -----Original Message----- > From: Akira Yamada [mailto:yamadaakir@nttdocomo.co.jp] > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 8:38 AM > To: blhole@venus.uos.ac.kr > Subject: Re: [manet] ping jitter > > Kim. > > What a protocol of a routing did you use? > (L2 or L3?) > > And how about the RTS/CTS? > How about carrier sense area? > > I think L2 may be congesting, and is retrasnsmitting. > > Akira Yamada NTT DoCoMo,Inc. > Communication Systems Laboratory, Wireless Laboratories. > TEL:+81-46-840-6527 FAX:+81-46-840-3789 > ayamada@mlab.yrp.nttdocomo.co.jp, yamadaakir@nttdocomo.co.jp > > > > > > > From: "Youngmin Kim" > Subject: [manet] ping jitter > Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:31:35 +0900 > > > Hello everyone!! > > > > In multi-hop ad-hoc network A-B-C (with manual route setup), I ping from > A > > to C. (intel 2011 WLAN: 802.11b) > > As shown example below, it doesn't give regular ping replies. > > Why do these things happen? > > Could I get papers about this problem? > > > > Thanks.... > > > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=6.94 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=3 ttl=63 time=365 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=4 ttl=63 time=15.6 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=5 ttl=63 time=88.5 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=6 ttl=63 time=21.2 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=7 ttl=63 time=15.1 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=8 ttl=63 time=58.2 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=9 ttl=63 time=17.0 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=10 ttl=63 time=15.0 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=11 ttl=63 time=15.6 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=12 ttl=63 time=11.2 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=13 ttl=63 time=18.1 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=14 ttl=63 time=7.15 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=15 ttl=63 time=103 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=16 ttl=63 time=7.14 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=17 ttl=63 time=7.60 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=18 ttl=63 time=7.45 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=19 ttl=63 time=7.15 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=20 ttl=63 time=72.9 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=21 ttl=63 time=7.19 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=22 ttl=63 time=7.17 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=23 ttl=63 time=9.79 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=24 ttl=63 time=17.8 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=25 ttl=63 time=46.2 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=26 ttl=63 time=61.3 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=27 ttl=63 time=11.4 ms > > .... > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=111 ttl=63 time=15.8 ms > > 64 bytes from 11.0.0.3: icmp_seq=112 ttl=63 time=132 ms > > > > --- 11.0.0.3 ping statistics --- > > 112 packets transmitted, 112 received, 0% packet loss, time 111589ms > > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/39.706/365.377/53.667 ms > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 2 08:30:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11261 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 08:30:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ane9D-0007iV-Rp for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:29:55 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i12DTthI029657 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 08:29:55 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ane9D-0007iG-Mn for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:29:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11190 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 08:29:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ane9C-0007ef-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:29:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ane7o-0007Hh-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:28:29 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ane5m-0006mU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:26:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ane5Y-0006rE-Te; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:26:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ane34-0005az-Jy for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:23:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA10362 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 08:23:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ane33-0006JN-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:23:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ane25-0006Ax-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:22:33 -0500 Received: from web41210.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.43]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ane17-0005y8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:21:33 -0500 Message-ID: <20040202132102.13831.qmail@web41210.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [203.143.130.7] by web41210.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 05:21:02 PST Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 05:21:02 -0800 (PST) From: Anand To: manet MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id IAA10363 Subject: [manet] SAODV implementation Details-Needed Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Respected Sir, I am trying to implement Secure Ad hoc on Demand routing using Glomosim as a Tool and try to modify the existing AODV protocol. I need to add Integrity using Hash Chain and Authenticity using Signatures. 1. I need to create my own data flow between nodes. But I cannot get how to make using your implementation. For example an Intruder node selectively drop or dosen=92t reply. In order to make this scenario, pl help me and=20 2. if I change the packet format as per requirement that is adding fields to secure such as hash and signature with the rreq or rrep message will it work.=20 3. And how to give my own outputs in the trace file of glomo.stat 4. how to do the performance comparisons. Please give me an overall idea about my issues it will be very much helpful for me. Thanks Anand=20 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 2 15:19:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA07024 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 15:19:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnkX8-0002X2-E7 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:19:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i12KJ2k3009732 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 15:19:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnkX8-0002Wt-5c for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:19:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06984 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 15:18:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnkX6-0004dv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:19:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnkWA-0004X2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:18:03 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnkVP-0004QK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:17:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnkVC-0001xh-GB; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:17:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnkUz-0001tP-3O for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:16:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06822 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 15:16:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnkUu-0004O2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:16:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnkTw-0004H4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:15:45 -0500 Received: from trinity.critical-systems.no ([194.143.111.171] helo=trinity.gnist.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnkT3-0004Ay-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:14:49 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by trinity.gnist.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42B5633095 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 21:14:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from trinity.gnist.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (trinity.gnist.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04541-07 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 21:14:47 +0100 (CET) Received: by trinity.gnist.org (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 84A96633094; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 21:14:47 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 21:14:47 +0100 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?T=F8nnesen?= To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040202201447.GB7303@trinity.gnist.org> Mail-Followup-To: manet@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline X-PGP-Public-Key: http://www.olsr.org/~andreto/pubkey.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 28CE 7490 60E0 B540 5F15 1054 C7C8 B66B E0E6 3197 X-PGP-KeyID: E0E63197 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] OLSR interop Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, With the latest release(0.3.5) of the uOLSR implementation I think I have got all the core functioning from RFC3626 covered. As there are guaranteed to be lots of bugs I would like to get some testing done beyond my regular lab setup. I remember there was some talk about a OLSR interop meeting - has there been any development considering those plans? I am really interested in both interop testing and uOLSR-only testing. So if anyone does some testing of the implementation I would appreciate bugreports and results :-) I am also very interested in reports of RFC possible incompliances! --=20 Andreas T=F8nnesen(andreas@olsr.org) UniK University Graduation Center University of Oslo http://www.olsr.org _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 2 19:35:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27238 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:35:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnoWs-0007iM-If for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:35:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i130Z1wc029630 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:35:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnoWq-0007hm-Qq for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:35:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27227 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:34:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnoWp-0006R7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:34:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnoVs-0006M1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:34:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnoVG-0006GK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:33:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnoUw-0007RO-F7; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:33:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnoTy-0007Fe-EK for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:32:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27163 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:31:58 -0500 (EST) From: richard.r.herron@L-3com.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnoTw-00069s-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:32:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnoT0-00064d-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:31:02 -0500 Received: from slxcg01.csw.l-3com.com ([128.170.12.150]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnoSh-0005z1-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:30:43 -0500 Received: by slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 17:30:08 -0700 Message-ID: <31892CFAF4097F488320D5FFDC60074001A1C636@slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com> To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 17:30:06 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [manet] HSLS implementation Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello, I am researching MANET protocols and hope to be able to test performance in our laboratory. Does anyone know of a publicly available implementation of HSLS? Also links about measured performance would be appreciated. Thanks, Richard Herron L-3 Communications _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 2 22:30:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA03436 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 22:30:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnrGI-0001QI-FK for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:30:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i133U6iV005469 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 22:30:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnrGI-0001Q8-Bg for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:30:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA03342 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 22:30:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnrGE-0000nK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:30:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnrFH-0000gy-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:29:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnrEM-0000bR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:28:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnrEI-0000mX-Ep; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:28:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnrDJ-0000kW-P7 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:27:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA03291 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 22:26:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnrDG-0000VU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:26:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnrCL-0000RP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:26:01 -0500 Received: from mail.ict.ac.cn ([159.226.39.4]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnrBZ-0000IB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:25:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 24867 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2004 03:13:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dream) (159.226.39.104) by mail.ict.ac.cn with SMTP; 3 Feb 2004 03:13:06 -0000 Message-ID: <00ee01c3ea04$98e79b30$0906a8c0@dream> From: "Li Ru" To: Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:19:55 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00EB_01C3EA47.A6D57350" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 Subject: [manet] Address Assignment Question Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_BASE64_TEXT autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00EB_01C3EA47.A6D57350 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkNCldoZW4gYW4gSW50ZXJuZXQgbm9kZSB3aGljaCBydW4gc3VjaCBhcyBSSVAgcHJvdG9jb2wg ZW50ZXJlZCBpbnRvIGEgbWFuZXQgZmllbGQsIGl0IHNob3VsZCBzdGFydCB0byBydW4gbWFuZXQg cm91dGluZyBwcm90b2NvbCBsaWtlIEFPRFYsIHdoaWNoIGFkZHJlc3MgaXQgc2hvdWxkIHVzZSwg dGhlIG9sZCBvbmUgb3IgYW4gbmV3IGFzc2lnbmVkIG9uZT8NCg0KTGkgUnUNCg== ------=_NextPart_000_00EB_01C3EA47.A6D57350 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPE1FVEEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj1Db250ZW50LVR5cGUgY29udGVu dD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PWdiMjMxMiI+DQo8TUVUQSBjb250ZW50PSJNU0hUTUwgNi4w MC4yNzM0LjE2MDAiIG5hbWU9R0VORVJBVE9SPg0KPFNUWUxFPjwvU1RZTEU+DQo8L0hFQUQ+DQo8 Qk9EWSBiZ0NvbG9yPSNmZmZmZmY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6 ZT0yPkhpPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+V2hlbiBhbiBJbnRlcm5ldCBu b2RlIHdoaWNoIHJ1biZuYnNwO3N1Y2ggYXMgUklQIA0KcHJvdG9jb2wmbmJzcDtlbnRlcmVkIGlu dG8gYSBtYW5ldCBmaWVsZCwgaXQgc2hvdWxkIHN0YXJ0IHRvIHJ1biBtYW5ldCByb3V0aW5nIA0K cHJvdG9jb2wgbGlrZSBBT0RWLCB3aGljaCBhZGRyZXNzIGl0IHNob3VsZCB1c2UsIHRoZSBvbGQg b25lIG9yIGFuIG5ldyBhc3NpZ25lZCANCm9uZT88L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNp emU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5MaSBSdTwvRk9OVD48 L0RJVj48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+PC9CT0RZPjwvSFRNTD4NCg== ------=_NextPart_000_00EB_01C3EA47.A6D57350-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 03:55:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA28571 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:55:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnwKu-0000cy-Ix for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:55:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i138tCUE002411 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:55:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnwKu-0000cm-6m for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:55:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA28507 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:55:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwKr-0003UD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:55:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwJu-0003Mr-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:54:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwIw-0003Gf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:53:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnwIp-0000IM-27; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:53:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnwI0-0000A4-Md for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:52:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA28447 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:52:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwHy-0003B0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:52:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwH1-00036U-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:51:11 -0500 Received: from [157.190.2.57] (helo=mail.cit.ie) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwGI-0002xw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:50:26 -0500 Received: from eeb285070069 (unverified [157.190.70.69]) by cit.ie (Rockliffe SMTPRA 5.3.4) with SMTP id for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:41:13 +0000 From: "susan rea" To: "manet" Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:53:34 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] DSR RREQ TTL VALUE Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In DSR how is the TTL (hop limit) value of an RREQ packet set? Regards, Susan -------------------Legal Disclaimer--------------------------------------- The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be protected by legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be received by you in error please contact the sender at the above quoted email address. Any unauthorised form of reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the security of any information electronically transmitted and is not liable if the information contained in this communication is not a proper and complete record of the message as transmitted by the sender nor for any delay in its receipt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 06:01:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA02424 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:01:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnyJ5-0007Oq-TX for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:01:28 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13B1Rv3028440 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:01:27 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnyJ5-0007Od-PD for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:01:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA02417 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:01:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyJ2-0007bt-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:01:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyI3-0007W6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:00:24 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyHq-0007QY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:00:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnyHl-00070m-IR; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:00:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnyGz-0006xb-MV for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:59:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA02367 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:59:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyGw-0007PJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:59:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyFy-0007KL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:58:14 -0500 Received: from gehenna.ece.cornell.edu ([128.84.95.235]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyF3-0007G6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:57:17 -0500 Received: from verdi (verdi.ece.cornell.edu [128.84.210.27]) by gehenna.ece.cornell.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F07061E8015; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:57:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:55:24 -0500 (EST) From: "haas@ece.cornell.edu" To: Laurent Dehoey Cc: manet@ietf.org, adhoc@n0rg.org Subject: Re: [manet] What happened to ZRP ? In-Reply-To: <401F7BBE.2070301@n0rg.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi Laurent, > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. We will be updating the ZRP draft in the near future with some implementation experience that we have gathered recently. In particular, we want to emphasize the *scalability* aspect of ZRP. Thus, we expect to submit the revised draft to the IRTF ANS group (http://www.flarion.com/ans-research/). If you need the old drafts, those are still available on our web page at: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu/wnlother.html Zygmunt. ==-=-===== ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- Prof. Zygmunt J. Haas http://people.ece.cornell.edu/haas Wireless Networks Laboratory http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu School of Electrical Engineering Cornell University tel: +1-607-255-3454 323 Frank Rhodes Hall fax: +1-607-255-9072 Ithaca, NY 14853 e-mail: haas@ece.cornell.edu U.S.A WNL web page: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Laurent Dehoey wrote: > Hello, > > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. > > Since there is no RFC published for it, and there is not much discussion > about it in the MANET mailing list, does it mean that we can "forget" it ? > > TIA > > Laurent Dehoey > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 06:04:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA02599 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:04:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnyLJ-0007WE-SW for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:03:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13B3iSE028893 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:03:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnyLI-0007Vw-EB for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:03:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA02569 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:03:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyLE-0000BK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:03:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyKW-00000c-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:02:57 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnyJJ-0007dH-05 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:01:41 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Any4L-0006OE-LD for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:46:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Any4A-0005t4-JN; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:46:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Any3X-0005oT-HC for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:45:23 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01732 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:45:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Any3T-00063Z-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:45:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Any2c-0005sV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:44:26 -0500 Received: from aputeaux-115-2-1-45.w193-251.abo.wanadoo.fr ([193.251.40.45] helo=hpp90.cbtrob.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Any1g-0005aU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:43:28 -0500 Received: from a600-xp.cbtrob.net ([192.168.1.17] helo=n0rg.org) by hpp90.cbtrob.net with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 1Any1B-0007f2-00; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:42:57 +0100 Message-ID: <401F7BBE.2070301@n0rg.org> Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:45:18 +0100 From: Laurent Dehoey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org CC: adhoc@n0rg.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] What happened to ZRP ? Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. Since there is no RFC published for it, and there is not much discussion about it in the MANET mailing list, does it mean that we can "forget" it ? TIA Laurent Dehoey _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 08:45:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA08473 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:45:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao0rm-0005Qv-F8 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:45:26 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13DjQVl020884 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:45:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao0rm-0005Ql-B4 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:45:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA08467 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:45:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao0rk-0002FD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:45:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao0qq-0002A8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:44:29 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao0qa-00024q-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:44:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao0qQ-0005EU-Ix; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:44:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao0pr-00055b-6Z for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:43:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA08427 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:43:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao0pp-00023B-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:43:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao0op-0001ye-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:42:24 -0500 Received: from agorate1.iserver.net ([128.121.116.81]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao0oR-0001uB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:41:59 -0500 Received: from dif.um.es (teo.dif.um.es [155.54.210.26]) by agorate1.iserver.net (8.12.10) id i13Dfttb038186; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:41:56 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <401FA2FA.8020807@dif.um.es> Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:32:42 +0100 From: "Pedro M. Ruiz" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031008 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] New I-D on requirements for MANET interworking with IP Multicast access networks Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear all, We've submitted the following Internet-Draft on Requirements for MANET Interworking with IP Multicast networks. This document aims at serving as a base document for the group to agree on a common set of requirements that any proposed solution should fulfill. It does not describe any particular solution. If fact, there may be requirements that I've missed, and may be you do not agree on considering some of them as requirements. So, I'd like to hear your comments to see if we manage to agree a common set of requirements for future solutions. In particular, I'd like to receive some feedback from those of you who are working on the interworking with wired networks (i.e. Charlie Perkins, Wakikawa, Jelger, Cha, etc.) because I think that many of your assumptions and experience for unicast interworking may also serve as a godo input for the multicast attachment problem. If fact, I'd be glad to count on any of you in the editing team for the next version of this draft, so that it can provide a wider view than my own. Thanks in advance, Pedro ------------- A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Requirements for MANET Interworking with Wired Multicast Networks Author(s) : P. Ruiz Filename : draft-ruiz-manet-mcast-gw-reqs-00.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2004-2-2 A Mobile Ad hoc Network (MANET) is formed by the spontaneous association of wireless and mobile devices capable of communicating among them even when there is no networking infrastructure available. Several unicast Internet gateway mechanisms have been proposed within the IETEF MANET WG. However, the particular nature of the IP Multicast model poses some additional requirements which need to be satisfied by candidate solutions. This document aims at identifying the requirements that a multicast solution for MANET interworking with a fixed IP Multicast network should satisfy. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ruiz-manet-mcast-gw-reqs-00.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ruiz-manet-mcast-gw-reqs-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ruiz-manet-mcast-gw-reqs-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 11:16:07 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16209 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:16:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3D8-0004P3-4i for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:15:38 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13GFc1x016921 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:15:38 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3D8-0004Oq-0v for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:15:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16195 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:15:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3D7-0003OE-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:15:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3CF-0003Hf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:14:43 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3Bg-0003Ax-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:14:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3BZ-00041C-AC; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:14:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3B8-0003yS-FZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:13:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16088 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:13:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3B7-00038E-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:13:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3AG-00031X-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:12:41 -0500 Received: from 66-152-29-4.ded.btitelecom.net ([66.152.29.4] helo=mail.scires.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao39Q-0002nG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:11:49 -0500 Received: from SRCATL-MTA by mail.scires.com with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:09:22 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.3 Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:08:48 -0500 From: "Pete Sholander" To: , Cc: , Subject: Re: [manet] What happened to ZRP ? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Laurent, A ZRP variant has been used for open-air field-tests (10 - 25 node) every = few months since last March. The implementation is similar to, but not = identical to, the ZRP drafts. We also have a version that uses OLSR as = its proactive component, that we use in our lab. I offered to update the ZRP drafts into an RFC document last March -- but = was told not to bother by Macker and Corson. So, Zygmunt's still = submitting items to the IRTF -- but I've dropped the issue for a while. = If ANS expresses serious interest in "hybrid" protocols -- and especially = ones that allow designers to incorporate their favorite proactive/reactive = components (e.g., OLSR and AODV) into a hybrid framework -- then I'll = contribute to I-Ds based on my group's field experience. --Pete Sholander Scientific Research Corporation =09 Atlanta, GA =09 E: psholander@scires.com V: 770-989-9551 >>> "haas@ece.cornell.edu" 02/03/04 05:55AM >>> Hi Laurent, > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. We will be updating the ZRP draft in the near future with some implementati= on=20 experience that we have gathered recently.=20 In particular, we want to emphasize the *scalability* aspect of ZRP. Thus, we expect to submit the revised draft to the IRTF ANS group (http://www.flarion.com/ans-research/). If you need the old drafts, those are still available on our web page = at:=20 http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu/wnlother.html=20 Zygmunt. =3D=3D-=3D-=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- Prof. Zygmunt J. Haas http://people.ece.cornell.edu/haas= =20 Wireless Networks Laboratory http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu=20 School of Electrical Engineering =20 Cornell University tel: +1-607-255-3454 323 Frank Rhodes Hall fax: +1-607-255-9072 Ithaca, NY 14853 e-mail: haas@ece.cornell.edu=20 U.S.A =20 WNL web page: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu=20 ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Laurent Dehoey wrote: > Hello, >=20 > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. >=20 > Since there is no RFC published for it, and there is not much discussion > about it in the MANET mailing list, does it mean that we can "forget" it = ? >=20 > TIA >=20 > Laurent Dehoey >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org=20 > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet=20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org=20 https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 11:55:01 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA17823 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:55:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3on-0007Q9-G8 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:54:33 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13GsXID028524 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:54:33 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3on-0007Pz-CZ for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:54:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA17779 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:54:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3om-0007KP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:54:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3nj-0007CL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:53:28 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3mk-00074f-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:52:26 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3mM-00075j-Bo; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:52:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao3lq-000744-Dg for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:51:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA17640 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:51:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3lp-0006xO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:51:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3kv-0006qd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:50:33 -0500 Received: from gehenna.ece.cornell.edu ([128.84.95.235]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao3k4-0006l3-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 11:49:41 -0500 Received: from photon.ece.cornell.edu (photon.ece.cornell.edu [128.84.81.138]) by gehenna.ece.cornell.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5C91E8014; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:49:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:49:31 -0500 (EST) From: Prince Samar To: manet@ietf.org Cc: manet@n0rg.org, Subject: Re: [manet] What happened to ZRP ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi Laurent, I would also like to point out that we have developed the Independent Zone Routing (IZR) framework, an enhancement of the ZRP, where each node can adaptively reconfigure its own optimal zone size depending on the local network characteristics (like node mobility, traffic patterns etc). This significantly improves the performance of IZR, making it more robust and scalable. Details can soon be found in: Prince Samar, Marc Pearlman, and Zygmunt Haas, "Independent Zone Routing: An Adaptive Hybrid Routing Framework for Ad Hoc Wireless Networks," in IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, August 2004 (expected). Regards, Prince On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Pete Sholander wrote: : Laurent, : : A ZRP variant has been used for open-air field-tests (10 - 25 node) every few months since last March. The implementation is similar to, but not identical to, the ZRP drafts. We also have a version that uses OLSR as its proactive component, that we use in our lab. : : I offered to update the ZRP drafts into an RFC document last March -- but was told not to bother by Macker and Corson. So, Zygmunt's still submitting items to the IRTF -- but I've dropped the issue for a while. If ANS expresses serious interest in "hybrid" protocols -- and especially ones that allow designers to incorporate their favorite proactive/reactive components (e.g., OLSR and AODV) into a hybrid framework -- then I'll contribute to I-Ds based on my group's field experience. : : --Pete Sholander : Scientific Research Corporation : Atlanta, GA : : E: psholander@scires.com : V: 770-989-9551 : : >>> "haas@ece.cornell.edu" 02/03/04 05:55AM >>> : Hi Laurent, : : > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last : > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january : > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. : : We will be updating the ZRP draft in the near future with some implementation : experience that we have gathered recently. : : In particular, we want to emphasize the *scalability* aspect of ZRP. Thus, : we expect to submit the revised draft to the IRTF ANS group : (http://www.flarion.com/ans-research/). : : If you need the old drafts, those are still available on our web page at: : http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu/wnlother.html : : Zygmunt. : ==-=-===== : ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- : Prof. Zygmunt J. Haas http://people.ece.cornell.edu/haas : Wireless Networks Laboratory http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu : School of Electrical Engineering : Cornell University tel: +1-607-255-3454 : 323 Frank Rhodes Hall fax: +1-607-255-9072 : Ithaca, NY 14853 e-mail: haas@ece.cornell.edu : U.S.A : WNL web page: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu : ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- : : On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Laurent Dehoey wrote: : : > Hello, : > : > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized that the last : > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january : > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. : > : > Since there is no RFC published for it, and there is not much discussion : > about it in the MANET mailing list, does it mean that we can "forget" it ? : > : > TIA : > : > Laurent Dehoey : > : > _______________________________________________ : > manet mailing list : > manet@ietf.org : > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet : : : _______________________________________________ : manet mailing list : manet@ietf.org : https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet : : : _______________________________________________ : manet mailing list : manet@ietf.org : https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet : : _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 12:12:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19055 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:12:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao45q-0001Wo-Ly for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:12:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13HCAtp005868 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:12:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao45q-0001WZ-HV for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:12:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19008 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:12:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao45p-0001eu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:12:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao44m-0001Tr-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:11:05 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao43u-0001Jn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:10:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao43o-0000zG-8q; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:10:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao43M-0000uy-1Z for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA18795 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:09:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao43K-0001FO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao42N-00016D-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:08:36 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao41X-0000tj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:07:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i13H77Ld006828 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:07:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004020312070732060 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:07:07 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20040203120350.02910b40@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:22 -0500 To: manet@ietf.org From: Joe Macker Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [manet] Possible no MANET meeting in Seoul Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 MANETers: Scott Corson and I (WG chairs) cannot attend the Seoul meeting and are recommended we skip this round and concentrate on firming up next step action items on the mailing list. If enough participants feel there should be a meeting with specific agenda items the ADs could possibly host a short meeting. -Joe _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 12:26:02 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19932 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:26:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao4Io-0002eE-V0 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:25:35 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13HPY96010172 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:25:34 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao4Io-0002dz-Pn for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:25:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19916 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:25:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao4In-0003c1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:25:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao4Hv-0003WM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:24:40 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao4HN-0003QR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:24:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao4HJ-0002L1-Mm; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:24:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao4Gn-0002KT-DU for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:23:29 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19810 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:23:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao4Gl-0003Nl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:23:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao4Fn-0003HZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:22:27 -0500 Received: from [131.175.54.147] (helo=salsa.cefriel.it) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao4Eu-00033j-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:21:32 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:22:50 +0100 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: NS calcdest/god Thread-Index: AcPqelmDs1qV2p40TS+RxHlqwg8+ig== From: "Andrea Giovanni Tamoni" To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] NS calcdest/god Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I have some questions.=20 Can anyone tell me the input file format for the calcdest Do I need to feed nodes numbered from 1 to n instead of nodes numbered = from 0 to n-1,for the calcdest to work? By the way, is calcdest useful? (the god (and DSR) uses this = information; but can it work the minimum hops distance (between two = nodes) out during the simulation ?) Thanks Andrea . _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 3 17:45:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA10235 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:45:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao9Hu-0000aY-NJ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:45:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i13MiwiB002256 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:44:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao9Hu-0000aJ-J3 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:44:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA10080 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:44:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao9Hr-0002zf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:44:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao9Fx-0002Wv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:42:58 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao9El-0002HA-01 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:41:43 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Ao92t-00070V-BY for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:29:27 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao92U-0007al-8S; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:29:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ao92F-0007a7-SG for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:28:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA09626 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:28:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao92D-0001Ez-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:28:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao91X-00018e-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:28:03 -0500 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmail.lab.flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ao90q-0000tQ-00; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:27:20 -0500 Received: by ftmail.lab.flarion.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <1FYGVMT9>; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:26:49 -0500 Message-ID: <9E3BA3946476AD4EB94672712B12A85FC89AC8@ftmail.lab.flarion.com> From: Corson Scott To: "'Pete Sholander'" , "'haas@ece.cornell.edu'" , "'manet@n0rg.org'" Cc: "'manet@ietf.org'" , "'adhoc@n0rg.org'" , "'ans-research@ietf.org'" Subject: RE: [manet] What happened to ZRP ? Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:26:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 ANS would likely be interested in such a submission. We are interested in practical/simulation work that demonstrates performance superior to that offered by running AODV or OLSR alone. -Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Pete Sholander > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 11:09 AM > To: haas@ece.cornell.edu; manet@n0rg.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org; adhoc@n0rg.org > Subject: Re: [manet] What happened to ZRP ? > > > Laurent, > > A ZRP variant has been used for open-air field-tests (10 - 25 > node) every few months since last March. The implementation > is similar to, but not identical to, the ZRP drafts. We also > have a version that uses OLSR as its proactive component, > that we use in our lab. > > I offered to update the ZRP drafts into an RFC document last > March -- but was told not to bother by Macker and Corson. > So, Zygmunt's still submitting items to the IRTF -- but I've > dropped the issue for a while. If ANS expresses serious > interest in "hybrid" protocols -- and especially ones that > allow designers to incorporate their favorite > proactive/reactive components (e.g., OLSR and AODV) into a > hybrid framework -- then I'll contribute to I-Ds based on my > group's field experience. > > --Pete Sholander > Scientific Research Corporation > Atlanta, GA > > E: psholander@scires.com > V: 770-989-9551 > > >>> "haas@ece.cornell.edu" 02/03/04 05:55AM >>> > Hi Laurent, > > > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized > that the last > > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january > > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. > > We will be updating the ZRP draft in the near future with > some implementation > experience that we have gathered recently. > > In particular, we want to emphasize the *scalability* aspect > of ZRP. Thus, > we expect to submit the revised draft to the IRTF ANS group > (http://www.flarion.com/ans-research/). > > If you need the old drafts, those are still available on our > web page at: > http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu/wnlother.html > > Zygmunt. > ==-=-===== > ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- > ~-~-~-~-~-~- > Prof. Zygmunt J. Haas > http://people.ece.cornell.edu/haas > Wireless Networks > Laboratory http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu > School of Electrical Engineering > Cornell University tel: +1-607-255-3454 > 323 Frank Rhodes Hall fax: +1-607-255-9072 > Ithaca, NY 14853 e-mail: haas@ece.cornell.edu > U.S.A > WNL web page: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu > ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- > ~-~-~-~-~-~- > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Laurent Dehoey wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I was looking for an implementation of ZRP when i realized > that the last > > draft of ZPR draft-ietf-manet-zone-zrp-04.txt has expired in january > > 2003 and was no more available on the IETF web. > > > > Since there is no RFC published for it, and there is not > much discussion > > about it in the MANET mailing list, does it mean that we > can "forget" it ? > > > > TIA > > > > Laurent Dehoey > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 02:49:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA24139 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:49:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoHmT-0007Je-HE for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:49:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i147n5e3028118 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:49:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoHmT-0007JR-A1 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:49:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA24068 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:49:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoHmP-00011j-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:49:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoHlS-0000tk-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:48:03 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoHke-0000n2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:47:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoHkW-0006um-3d; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:47:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoHjg-0006rG-Cd for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:46:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA23932 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:46:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoHjc-0000dS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:46:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoHio-0000VI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:45:19 -0500 Received: from mail.ict.ac.cn ([159.226.39.4]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoHi9-0000Hv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 02:44:37 -0500 Received: (qmail 11366 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2004 06:39:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dream) (159.226.39.104) by mail.ict.ac.cn with SMTP; 4 Feb 2004 06:39:15 -0000 Message-ID: <003001c3eaea$96e6f0b0$0906a8c0@dream> From: "Li Ru" To: Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:46:15 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002D_01C3EB2D.A3E1B640" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 Subject: [manet] question about address autoconfig Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_BASE64_TEXT autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C3EB2D.A3E1B640 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 RGVhciBBbGwNCg0KV2hlbiBzaG91bGQgYSBub2RlIGluIG1hbmV0IHRvIGJlIGF1dG9jb25maWdl ZCBhbiBhZGRyZXNzLCBleGNlcHQgZm9yIHN0YXJ0aW5nIHRoZSBjb21wdXRlciwganVzdCBjb21p bmcgaW50byB0aGlzIG1hbmV0IGZpZWxkLg0KDQpMaWx5DQo= ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C3EB2D.A3E1B640 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPE1FVEEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj1Db250ZW50LVR5cGUgY29udGVu dD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PWdiMjMxMiI+DQo8TUVUQSBjb250ZW50PSJNU0hUTUwgNi4w MC4yNzM0LjE2MDAiIG5hbWU9R0VORVJBVE9SPg0KPFNUWUxFPjwvU1RZTEU+DQo8L0hFQUQ+DQo8 Qk9EWSBiZ0NvbG9yPSNmZmZmZmY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5EZWFyIEFsbDwvRk9OVD48 L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQg c2l6ZT0yPldoZW4mbmJzcDtzaG91bGQgYSBub2RlIGluIG1hbmV0Jm5ic3A7dG8gYmUgYXV0b2Nv bmZpZ2VkIGFuIA0KYWRkcmVzcywgZXhjZXB0IGZvciBzdGFydGluZyB0aGUgY29tcHV0ZXIsIGp1 c3QgY29taW5nIGludG8mbmJzcDt0aGlzIG1hbmV0IA0KZmllbGQuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJ Vj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+TGls eTwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj48L0JPRFk+PC9IVE1MPg0K ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C3EB2D.A3E1B640-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 03:46:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA26130 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:46:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoIfe-0002iG-O1 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:46:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i148k6aC010422 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:46:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoIfe-0002i1-FG for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:46:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA26087 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:46:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoIfb-00070x-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:46:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoIei-0006sY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:45:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoIds-0006lx-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:44:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoIdf-0002IR-9R; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:44:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoIcj-00029f-TE for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:43:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA25915 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:43:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoIch-0006eZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:43:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoIbn-0006ZD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:42:07 -0500 Received: from [202.84.232.68] (helo=mail.aitlbd.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoIbA-0006TU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:41:29 -0500 Received: from p222.aitlbd.net (p222.aitlbd.net [202.84.231.222]) by mail.aitlbd.net (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i148Vhe01336 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:31:44 +0600 (GMT) From: merajul Organization: BUET To: manet@ietf.org Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 14:43:49 +0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200307121443.49075.merajul@aitlbd.net> AFTAB-IT-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Video telephony on MANET Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi! I am doing a thesis on Video telephony on MANET. What kind of works have been done on this topic ? Can anyone please refer any paper/ provide any link on video telephony on MANET ? What kind of simulation support is there in ns2 for this kind of works ? -- Mohammad Merajul Islam Molla Department of Computer Science & Engineering ( Final Year ) Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology (BUET) Dhaka, Bangladesh. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by AFTAB IT MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 05:45:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA29811 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 05:45:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoKX3-0002VS-4E for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:45:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14AjLED009632 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 05:45:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoKX2-0002VH-S9 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:45:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA29712 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 05:45:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKWz-00035E-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:45:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKVv-0002sX-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:44:12 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKVN-0002m2-03 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:43:37 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AoKSB-00061A-U4 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:40:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoKRu-0001tL-Qb; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:40:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoKQz-0001sB-Ss for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:39:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA29535 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 05:39:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKQw-0002O0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:39:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKQ6-0002Ja-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:38:11 -0500 Received: from agorate1.iserver.net ([128.121.116.81]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKPL-0002Er-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:37:23 -0500 Received: from dif.um.es (teo.dif.um.es [155.54.210.26]) by agorate1.iserver.net (8.12.10) id i14Ab5i9006012; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:37:07 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <4020C925.5070402@dif.um.es> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 11:27:49 +0100 From: "Pedro M. Ruiz" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031008 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: merajul CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Video telephony on MANET References: <200307121443.49075.merajul@aitlbd.net> In-Reply-To: <200307121443.49075.merajul@aitlbd.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by agorate1.iserver.net id i14Ab5i9006012 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, We did some experiments on videoconferencing over MANETs and how=20 adaptive applications could help at improving the user perceived QoS.=20 May be you can have a look at these papers. Some of them are on-line at=20 http://ants.dif.um.es/staff/pedrom/publications.html. Just ask me if you=20 do not manage to find any of the others. Pedro M. Ruiz, Juan Bot=EDa, Antonio Gomez-Skarmeta. *=94Intelligent and=20 Adaptive Middleware to Improve User-Perceived QoS=94*. In proceedings of=20 the 14th IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile=20 Radio Communications (PIMRC=92 2003). Beijing, September 2003. Vol 3,=20 pp.2412-2416. Pedro M. Ruiz and Antonio F. G=F3mez-Skarmeta, *"Using Genetic Algorithms= =20 to Optimize the Behavior of Adaptive Multimedia Applications in Wireless=20 and Mobile Scenarios"*. In proc. of the IEEE Wireless Communications and=20 Networking Conference (WCNC'2003). New Orleans, Louisiana. March, 2003. Pedro M. Ruiz, Antonio F. G=F3mez-Skarmeta, Pedro Mart=EDnez, Juan A.=20 S=E1nchez and Emilio Garc=EDa, *"Effective Multimedia and Multy-party=20 Communications on Multicast MANET Extensions to IP Access Networks"*. In=20 proc. of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Information=20 Networking ICOIN-2003. Jeju Island, Korea, February, 2003. pp 870-879 Best wishes, Pedro merajul wrote: >Hi! > I am doing a thesis on Video telephony on MANET. What kind of works hav= e been > done on this topic ? >=09 > Can anyone please refer any paper/ provide any link on video telephony = on=20 >MANET ? > > What kind of simulation support is there in ns2 for this kind of wor= ks ? > > =20 > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 06:19:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA00727 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 06:19:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoL3n-00046G-2C for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:19:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14BJBA1015754 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 06:19:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoL3m-000461-Qo for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:19:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA00684 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 06:19:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoL3i-0006Pv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:19:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoL2l-0006JW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:18:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoL1q-0006E3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:17:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoL1h-0003m5-Py; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:17:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoL0o-0003lh-3b for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:16:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA00618 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 06:16:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoL0k-00068T-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:16:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKzl-00064E-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:15:02 -0500 Received: from web8312.mail.in.yahoo.com ([203.199.122.12]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoKzZ-000603-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:14:49 -0500 Message-ID: <20040204111419.82688.qmail@web8312.mail.in.yahoo.com> Received: from [202.131.132.148] by web8312.mail.in.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 11:14:19 GMT Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:14:19 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?niranjan=20raja?= To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [manet] question about congestion control in glomosim. Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit hi, i am analysing congestion control algorithm for wireless networks using glomosim. i don't know where and how to modify the present algorithm and also what is the algorithm currently used. suggestions are expected. regards niranjan raja.j niran_345@yahoo.co.in ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Mobile: Download the latest polyphonic ringtones. Go to http://in.mobile.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 09:07:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA06179 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:07:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoNgT-000765-8v for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:07:17 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14E7HOD027275 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:07:17 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoNgS-00075q-SZ for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:07:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA06117 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:07:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoNgR-0007Qm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:07:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoNfV-0007IW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:06:18 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoNeb-0007Au-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:05:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoNeK-0006dl-Be; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:05:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoNdj-0006Z0-Qb for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:04:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA05996 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoNdi-00073u-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:04:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoNck-0006wO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:03:27 -0500 Received: from iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.10.81]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoNbt-0006ox-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 09:02:33 -0500 Received: from irams1.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.10.5] helo=irams1.ira.uka.de) by iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #10 (Debian)) id 1AoNbp-0000lL-00 for ; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 15:02:29 +0100 Received: from i72tribble.tm.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.71.8] helo=tribble ident=weniger) by irams1.ira.uka.de with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #7 ) id 1AoNbo-0002bO-00; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 15:02:28 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Kilian Weniger Organization: University of Karlsruhe To: manet@ietf.org Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 15:02:27 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: stanze@tm.uka.de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200402041502.27909.weniger@tm.uka.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] Loops in AODV due to seqno wrap-arounds? Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, we encountered a (admittedly very rare) scenario with AODV, which we thin= k may=20 result in permanent loops in case a sequence number wrap-around occurs.=20 In the following, we describe the scenario. We denote a DSN for node C at= node=20 A with DSN_A(C).=20 The maximum possible value of the sequence number is denoted by MAX_VALUE= =2E =2E. - A - B - C - .. - D=20 1. A has an active route to C 2. DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/2 3. D has an active route to C, which breaks frequently -> D issues RREQs = and=20 DSN_C(C) increases permanently 4. A does not receive the RREQs -> DSN_A(C) does not change (still smalle= r=20 than MAX_VALUE/2) 5. B knows current DSN of C (DSN_B(C)=3D=3DDSN_C(C)) because of received = RREQs or=20 Hellos 6. Wrap-around of DSN_C(C) occurs -> 0 < DSN_C(C) < DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/= 2=20 with DSN_B(C)=3D=3DDSN_C(C) 7. New node E joins MANET and issues RREQ for C.=20 The scenario is now as follows: E / \ =2E. - A - B - C - .. - D=20 8. E receives RREP from A and B and chooses A as next hop because DSN_A(C= ) >=20 DSN_B(C) 9. Link B->C breaks and B issues RREQ for C. 10. B receives RREP only from E, because A did not receive the RREQ (or A= 's=20 RREP got lost), e.g., due to MAC layer collisions 11. B chooses E as next hop, because DSN_E(C) > DSN_B(C) -> Loop A-B-E Our questions are:=20 Is our conclusion correct? If so, is the scenario relevant enough in practice to be considered?=20 Think of A, B, C as static nodes, e.g., because they are internet gateways, which are connected via ad hoc links. Node D (and others) are m= obile nodes, so that link breaks occur frequently.=20 An incrementation of the DSN_C(C) by MAX_VALUE/2 with MAX_VALUE=3D2^32-1 = takes=20 at least MAX_VALUE/2*RREQ_RATE_LIMIT=3D~6.8 years per route to C, if the = SN is=20 increased by one each time. With 100 routes to C, it takes at least ~24 d= ays.=20 According to RFC 3561 section 6.3 ("...which is incremented prior..."), i= t not=20 forbidden to increase the SN by more than one before sending a RREQ. Thus= , it=20 may take a much shorter time span, depending on the implementation. If the scenario is relevant, shouldn't wrap-arounds better be handled=20 differently in a future version of AODV?=20 Best regards, Kilian Weniger, Oliver Stanze --=20 Dipl.-Ing. Kilian Weniger=09 Institute of Telematics, Universitaet Karlsruhe (TH) Zirkel 2, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany Email: weniger@tm.uka.de, HP: http://www.tm.uka.de/~weniger _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 10:26:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA10415 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:26:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoOuz-0001uN-Pb for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:26:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14FQL3c007335 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:26:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoOuz-0001uD-Iz for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:26:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA10390 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:26:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoOux-0007jI-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:26:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoOu0-0007df-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:25:21 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoOtM-0007Y7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:24:40 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoOsk-0001X3-2s; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:24:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoOs8-0001Vx-Uu for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:23:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA10303 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:23:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoOs6-0007Sl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:23:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoOr7-0007Ne-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:22:22 -0500 Received: from web21108.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.227.110]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoOqr-0007ID-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:22:05 -0500 Message-ID: <20040204152201.15943.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.119.86.30] by web21108.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 07:22:01 PST Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 07:22:01 -0800 (PST) From: Vin To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] aodv from ns-2.1b9 to ns-2.26 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi all. This is a question i want to address to people who have used aodv on both ns 2.1b9 and ns 2.26 and i think there would be many on this forum. I have a modified AODV protocol for the 2.1b9 version which i acquired from someone else. To evaluate it, i replaced the aodv related files in my ns 2.26 installation with these modified aodv files which were written for ns 2.1b9. I had to do a couple of simple hacks to get it running. According to the person who implemented it, this modified aodv gave better performance for the inputs he used. But when i run it, i find only degradation of performance. so my question is are the results itself invalid or is it because of running 2.1b9 code on ns 2.26? Maybe ns 2.26 has done some modifications to improve performance and at the sametime penalizing old version code. I am not much familiar with the evolution of aodv over these two versions and would appreciate some insight from someone who does. Thanks in advance, Vin __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 10:54:07 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA12014 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:54:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoPLQ-0004CK-Sl for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:53:41 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14Fre0L016135 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:53:40 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoPLQ-0004CA-ML for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:53:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA12004 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:53:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoPLO-0003EK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:53:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoPKa-000362-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:52:49 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoPJu-0002wh-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:52:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoPIt-0003pN-Lx; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoPI5-0003ZL-Me for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:50:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11813 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:50:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoPI3-0002mB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:50:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoPH6-0002fJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:49:12 -0500 Received: from web60909.mail.yahoo.com ([216.155.196.85]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoPGA-0002UG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:48:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20040204154742.6452.qmail@web60909.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [156.26.108.10] by web60909.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 07:47:42 PST Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 07:47:42 -0800 (PST) From: Jas C To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1572345248-1075909662=:4909" Subject: [manet] Carrier Sensing in 802.11 DCF Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-1572345248-1075909662=:4909 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi all, As per the IEEE 802.11 Specifications, the Short Inter Frame Space (SIFS) has the following functions in DCF: 1. Allow stations that have seized the medium to retain it for the duration of their frame exchange sequence. 2. Prevent other nodes from accessing the medium when there is an on-going transmission 3. To seperate transmissions belonging to the same conversation 4. Allow nodes to reverse roles from Transmit to Receive mode and vice-versa Pertaining to point 3, does every node perform physical carrier sensing for SIFS beore it actually transmits CTS, DATA or ACK frames for the same conversation? According to me, physical carrier sensing is performed only once for DIFS before initiating an RTS for any new transaction. Please help in clarifying this doubt. Thanks in advance, Jasmina Chauhan --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! --0-1572345248-1075909662=:4909 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Hi all,
 
As per the IEEE 802.11 Specifications, the Short Inter Frame Space (SIFS) has the following functions in DCF:
 
1. Allow stations that have seized the medium to retain it for the duration of their frame exchange sequence.
 
2. Prevent other nodes from accessing the medium when there is an on-going transmission 
 
3.  To seperate transmissions belonging to the same conversation
 
4. Allow nodes to reverse roles from Transmit to Receive mode and vice-versa
 
Pertaining to point 3, does every node perform physical carrier sensing for SIFS beore it actually transmits CTS, DATA or ACK frames for the same conversation?
 
According to me, physical carrier sensing is performed only once for DIFS before initiating an RTS for any new transaction.
 
Please help in clarifying this doubt.
 
Thanks in advance,
Jasmina Chauhan

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! --0-1572345248-1075909662=:4909-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 12:37:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16721 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:37:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoQxl-0005mr-VL for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:37:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14HbLEE022242 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:37:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoQxl-0005mf-KO for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:37:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16712 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:37:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoQxk-0006aW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:37:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoQws-0006VC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:36:26 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoQwd-0006Pf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:36:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoQwT-0005Xb-UP; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:36:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoQvr-0005Uj-Ug for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:35:23 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16597 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:35:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoQvq-0006Nn-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:35:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoQv4-0006Hf-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:34:35 -0500 Received: from stamps.cs.ucsb.edu ([128.111.41.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoQuJ-0006Al-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:33:47 -0500 Received: from kenai.cs.ucsb.edu (csil.cs.ucsb.edu [128.111.41.12]) by stamps.cs.ucsb.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i14HU2oT016022; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:30:02 -0800 (PST) From: Ian Chakeres MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16417.11465.688710.612870@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:32:57 -0800 To: Kilian Weniger Cc: manet@ietf.org, stanze@tm.uka.de Subject: RE:[manet] Loops in AODV due to seqno wrap-arounds? In-Reply-To: <200402041502.27909.weniger@tm.uka.de> References: <200402041502.27909.weniger@tm.uka.de> X-Mailer: VM 7.15 under Emacs 21.3.1 Reply-To: idc@cs.ucsb.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit How would you suggest to handle this situation? Or what is a better way to perform DSN wrap-around? Ian Chakeres >Kilian Weniger wrote: >Hi, > >we encountered a (admittedly very rare) scenario with AODV, which we think may >result in permanent loops in case a sequence number wrap-around occurs. > >In the following, we describe the scenario. We denote a DSN for node C at node >A with DSN_A(C). >The maximum possible value of the sequence number is denoted by MAX_VALUE. > > >.. - A - B - C - .. - D > > >1. A has an active route to C >2. DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/2 >3. D has an active route to C, which breaks frequently -> D issues RREQs and >DSN_C(C) increases permanently >4. A does not receive the RREQs -> DSN_A(C) does not change (still smaller >than MAX_VALUE/2) >5. B knows current DSN of C (DSN_B(C)==DSN_C(C)) because of received RREQs or >Hellos >6. Wrap-around of DSN_C(C) occurs -> 0 < DSN_C(C) < DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/2 >with DSN_B(C)==DSN_C(C) >7. New node E joins MANET and issues RREQ for C. > >The scenario is now as follows: > > > E > / \ >.. - A - B - C - .. - D > > >8. E receives RREP from A and B and chooses A as next hop because DSN_A(C) > >DSN_B(C) >9. Link B->C breaks and B issues RREQ for C. >10. B receives RREP only from E, because A did not receive the RREQ (or A's >RREP got lost), e.g., due to MAC layer collisions >11. B chooses E as next hop, because DSN_E(C) > DSN_B(C) -> Loop A-B-E > > >Our questions are: > >Is our conclusion correct? > >If so, is the scenario relevant enough in practice to be considered? > >Think of A, B, C as static nodes, e.g., because they are internet >gateways, which are connected via ad hoc links. Node D (and others) are mobile >nodes, so that link breaks occur frequently. > >An incrementation of the DSN_C(C) by MAX_VALUE/2 with MAX_VALUE=2^32-1 takes >at least MAX_VALUE/2*RREQ_RATE_LIMIT=~6.8 years per route to C, if the SN is >increased by one each time. With 100 routes to C, it takes at least ~24 days. >According to RFC 3561 section 6.3 ("...which is incremented prior..."), it not >forbidden to increase the SN by more than one before sending a RREQ. Thus, it >may take a much shorter time span, depending on the implementation. > >If the scenario is relevant, shouldn't wrap-arounds better be handled >differently in a future version of AODV? > > >Best regards, > > >Kilian Weniger, Oliver Stanze > >-- >Dipl.-Ing. Kilian Weniger >Institute of Telematics, Universitaet Karlsruhe (TH) >Zirkel 2, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany >Email: weniger@tm.uka.de, HP: http://www.tm.uka.de/~weniger > > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 14:25:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21331 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:25:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSdY-0004jq-Jj for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:24:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14JOa18018213 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:24:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSdY-0004jg-AM for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:24:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21300 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:24:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSdV-0002Fp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:24:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoScW-0002A9-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:23:33 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSc9-000245-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:23:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSc2-0004Kn-A3; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:23:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSbN-0004J9-Sf for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:22:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21226 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:22:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSbL-00022k-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:22:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSaQ-0001xq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:21:23 -0500 Received: from adsl-63-194-88-247.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([63.194.88.247] helo=farpoint.tear.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSZW-0001sy-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:20:26 -0500 Received: from computer.org (dhcp-105.tear.com [172.16.0.105]) by farpoint.tear.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i14JKONn002362 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:20:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marc@computer.org) Message-ID: <402145F7.4060002@computer.org> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 11:20:23 -0800 From: Marc Mosko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE:[manet] Loops in AODV due to seqno wrap-arounds? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A missing element of Step 9 is that B would send a RERR to A when it's link to C breaks. Assuming that B had multiple predecessors and it broadcasts the packet, the RERR could be lost easily. Another thing would be that the loop is as permanent as the break in link B-C. If the link came back, node B should believe the 1-hop hello messages over the route from A, even if DSN_C(C) < DSN_A(C). But one could construct a similar loop argument where B and C were not directly attached. One workaround to this is to use really big sequence numbers, such as a 64-bit number that has 32-bits from the node's real-time clock (to avoid reset on reboot) and 32-bits for a counter. One could use fewer bits for the counter, whatever is practical to avoid overflow in 1 second. One would want to use the UTC node time to avoid daylight savings, etc. For all practical considerations, such a counter is unbounded because one would assume the node's clock would not overflow during the node's lifetime. This, of course, is not compatible with the current version of AODV. Other solutions could include some sort of network-wide reset, but that incurs flooding overhead and you have to make it reliable and it will have problems with temporary network partitons. A heuristic that works with the current AODV version is what we called "RREQ as error" [1]. It does not absolutely prevent the loop forming, but could help avoid it. If a node, such as A, receives a RREQ from its successor for that successor route and by all metrics stored at A, the successor should have replied to it, node A can take that RREQ as an implicit RERR. Node A may assume that its successor B has DSN_B(C) >= DSN_A(C) (in whatever modulo math used). This must always be true for loop-freedom. If B transmits a RREQ for C with DSN_RREQ(C) < DSN_A(C), node A may assume that node B no longer has a valid loop-free route to C and node A can break its successor link. Marc Mosko UC Santa Cruz [1] J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, Marc Mosko, Charles E. Perkins, "A New Approach to On-Demand Loop Free Routing in Ad Hoc Networks", PODC 2003, Boston, MA, July 2003, pp. 53 - 62 >Kilian Weniger wrote: >Hi, > >we encountered a (admittedly very rare) scenario with AODV, which we think may >result in permanent loops in case a sequence number wrap-around occurs. > >In the following, we describe the scenario. We denote a DSN for node C at node >A with DSN_A(C). >The maximum possible value of the sequence number is denoted by MAX_VALUE. > > >.. - A - B - C - .. - D > > >1. A has an active route to C >2. DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/2 >3. D has an active route to C, which breaks frequently -> D issues RREQs and >DSN_C(C) increases permanently >4. A does not receive the RREQs -> DSN_A(C) does not change (still smaller >than MAX_VALUE/2) >5. B knows current DSN of C (DSN_B(C)==DSN_C(C)) because of received RREQs or >Hellos >6. Wrap-around of DSN_C(C) occurs -> 0 < DSN_C(C) < DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/2 >with DSN_B(C)==DSN_C(C) >7. New node E joins MANET and issues RREQ for C. > >The scenario is now as follows: > > > E > / \ >.. - A - B - C - .. - D > > >8. E receives RREP from A and B and chooses A as next hop because DSN_A(C) > >DSN_B(C) >9. Link B->C breaks and B issues RREQ for C. >10. B receives RREP only from E, because A did not receive the RREQ (or A's >RREP got lost), e.g., due to MAC layer collisions >11. B chooses E as next hop, because DSN_E(C) > DSN_B(C) -> Loop A-B-E > > >Our questions are: > >Is our conclusion correct? > >If so, is the scenario relevant enough in practice to be considered? > >Think of A, B, C as static nodes, e.g., because they are internet >gateways, which are connected via ad hoc links. Node D (and others) are mobile >nodes, so that link breaks occur frequently. > >An incrementation of the DSN_C(C) by MAX_VALUE/2 with MAX_VALUE=2^32-1 takes >at least MAX_VALUE/2*RREQ_RATE_LIMIT=~6.8 years per route to C, if the SN is >increased by one each time. With 100 routes to C, it takes at least ~24 days. >According to RFC 3561 section 6.3 ("...which is incremented prior..."), it not >forbidden to increase the SN by more than one before sending a RREQ. Thus, it >may take a much shorter time span, depending on the implementation. > >If the scenario is relevant, shouldn't wrap-arounds better be handled >differently in a future version of AODV? > > >Best regards, _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 14:42:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22002 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:42:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSup-0006r8-4w for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:42:27 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14JgRW1026351 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:42:27 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSuo-0006qw-Uk for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:42:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21995 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:42:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSum-0003v0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:42:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoStp-0003pd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:41:26 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoStc-0003ke-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:41:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoStR-0006ZU-Oi; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:41:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoSst-0006Xo-Oy for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:40:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21903 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:40:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSsr-0003iz-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:40:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSrl-0003co-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:39:18 -0500 Received: from www1.mail.lycos.com ([209.202.220.140] helo=lycos.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoSqs-0003Th-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:38:22 -0500 Received: from Unknown/Local ([?.?.?.?]) by mailcity.com; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:37:37 -0000 To: manet@ietf.org Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 11:37:37 -0800 From: "Sayeem Ahmed" Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sent-Mail: off Reply-To: sayeem@lycos.com X-Mailer: MailCity Service X-Priority: 1 X-Sender-Ip: 207.157.122.252 Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Language: en Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Help in using OPNET for DSR and TORA Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,X_PRIORITY_HIGH autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I am using OPNET for performance evaluation of DSR and TORA. This is my master's thesis. I need help in using OPNET Modeler 10.0. I understand that there are documents available in OPNET's own website regarding how to use their wireless module. But a little bit extra help from any source, i.e. books or any site will mean a lot to me. I am out of time in my thesis and I need it real sharp. Please please someone suggest me any book's name or any site in this regard. Thanks in advance. Regards, Sayeem ECE, Univ of South Alabama ____________________________________________________________ Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 14:56:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22436 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:56:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoT8R-0007yE-0n for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:56:31 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14JuU3h030632 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:56:30 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoT8Q-0007xz-QW for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:56:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22426 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:56:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoT8N-0005I0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:56:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoT7N-0005C5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:55:26 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoT7A-000578-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:55:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoT71-0007Zc-SM; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:55:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoT6M-0007Yc-0Q for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:54:22 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22374 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:54:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoT6J-00056E-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:54:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoT5M-00051w-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:53:20 -0500 Received: from letters.cs.ucsb.edu ([128.111.41.13]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoT52-0004xt-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:53:00 -0500 Received: from yosemite.cs.ucsb.edu (yosemite [128.111.40.103]) by letters.cs.ucsb.edu (8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7) with ESMTP id i14Jqtg26404 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:52:55 -0800 (PST) From: Elizabeth Belding-Royer To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1075924376.29938.40.camel@yosemite.cs.ucsb.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 04 Feb 2004 11:52:56 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Proposed New ANS Charter Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, As described in Scott's message below, we have revised the ANS charter to be much broader and more comprehensive of important open problems in mobile network research. I encourage everyone to read the new charter and subscribe to the mailing list if you are interested in contributing to the progress of the research group. Our next meeting is likely to be held at Mobisys in Boston in June. Because this is still 4 months away, we are hoping to get active participation on the mailing list between now and then. Elizabeth -----Forwarded Message----- > From: Corson Scott > To: 'ans-research@ietf.org' > Subject: [Ans-research] Proposed New ANS Charter > Date: 03 Feb 2004 16:23:40 -0500 > > > Folks, > > Numerous RG participants have expressed the view that the previous ANS > charter's research scope was too *narrow*. > > We have discussed this with Avri Doria (the new Routing Research Group > chairperson) and after scratching our heads for a time, have come up with > the following proposed charter. > > http://www.flarion.com/ans-research/ > > We welcome feedback on the proposed charter. > > Are people OK with this? Suggestions please? > > Thx, > > -Scott > > _______________________________________________ > Ans-research mailing list > Ans-research@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ans-research _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 17:04:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03321 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 17:04:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoV7a-0002zo-Q2 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:03:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14M3k37011515 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 17:03:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoV7a-0002ze-JX for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:03:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03317 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 17:03:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoV7Y-00064e-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:03:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoV74-0005xc-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:03:15 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoV68-0005mx-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:02:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoV5t-0002go-Ea; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:02:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoV4y-0002do-1O for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:01:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03027 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 17:01:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoV4v-0005ds-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:01:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoV42-0005TG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:00:06 -0500 Received: from mailgw2a.lmco.com ([192.91.147.7]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoV3G-0005IP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:59:18 -0500 Received: from emss03g01.ems.lmco.com (relay3.ems.lmco.com [141.240.4.144]) by mailgw2a.lmco.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i14LxIQv004074 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 16:59:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.lmco.com by lmco.com (PMDF V6.1-1X6 #30875) id <0HSK00201YEUYL@lmco.com> for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:59:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from EMSS03I00.us.lmco.com ([141.240.31.211]) by lmco.com (PMDF V6.1-1X6 #30875) with ESMTP id <0HSK000L4YETX7@lmco.com> for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:59:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from EMSS03M06.us.lmco.com ([166.27.250.213]) by EMSS03I00.us.lmco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:59:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:59:17 -0500 From: "Schwentner, Jeffrey" To: manet@ietf.org Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-Topic: AODV Collision Avoidance Thread-Index: AcPraohegeWHD0GXQwqj/SSBoF+Mxg== content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Feb 2004 21:59:17.0379 (UTC) FILETIME=[2276FD30:01C3EB6A] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I am working on a project which requires a very low-level implementation of an Ad-Hoc routing mechanism. I found the AODV concept to be quite interesting, and had a question regarding the transmission of packets. Consider the case when a node transmits a RREQ to it's neighbors. When the neighbors receive the packet and prepare to send it on to their neighbors collisions might occur if they transmit at the same time. Has there been any thought in the group to incorporating some kind of delay scheme to avoid simultaneous transmission following packet reception? My implementation requires the use of a half-duplex RF transceiver, which is why I cannot detect collisions during transmission! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated, Jeff Schwentner > Lockheed Martin Simulation, Training & Support email: jeffrey.schwentner@lmco.com _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 18:36:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08603 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:36:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoWYk-0007Oh-1H for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:35:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i14NZrcZ028431 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:35:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoWYj-0007OU-SE for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:35:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08592 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:35:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoWYg-0000SS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:35:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoWXh-0000KK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:34:50 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoWX3-0000Co-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:34:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoWWw-00075s-22; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:34:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoWWW-00074Z-ES for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:33:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08545 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:33:32 -0500 (EST) From: mehrana@uow.edu.au Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoWWT-0000Bi-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:33:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoWVV-00006g-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:32:34 -0500 Received: from evaki.its.uow.edu.au ([130.130.68.32]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoWVE-00001N-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:32:16 -0500 Received: from evaki (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by evaki.its.uow.edu.au (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i14NW8OL004416; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:32:08 +1100 (EST) Received: from chac.its.uow.edu.au ([130.130.37.3]) by evaki.its.uow.edu.au (MailMonitor for SMTP v1.2.2 ) ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:32:08 +1100 (EST) Received: from sendmail by chac.its.uow.edu.au with local (Exim 4.30) id 1AoWV5-00054R-SD; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:32:07 +1100 Received: from mirapoint.uow.edu.au (mirapoint.uow.edu.au[130.130.68.27]) by chac.its.uow.edu.au (UWSMTPD 1.6) with ESMTP id 2195656.18878; Thursday, 05 February 2004 10:31:20 +1100 Received: from 203.202.119.24 by mirapoint.uow.edu.au (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.8-GR) with HTTP/1.1; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:31:19 +1100 Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:31:19 +1100 Subject: Re: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance To: "Schwentner, Jeffrey" Cc: manet@ietf.org X-Mailer: Webmail Mirapoint Direct 3.3.8-GR MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <373efa16.d164dcc.8167700@mirapoint.uow.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MessageID: 2195656.18878 X-EnvelopeFrom: 2195656.18878 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Jeffrey, AODV uses a broadcast jitter during RREQ propagation to minimize collisions. You can also randomize the RREQ packet propagation time with the Jitter (as is done in GlomoSim), to also reduce collisions. Hope That helped. Mehran ---- Original message ---- >Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:59:17 -0500 >From: "Schwentner, Jeffrey" >Subject: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance >To: manet@ietf.org > >I am working on a project which requires a very low-level implementation of an Ad-Hoc routing mechanism. I found the AODV concept to be quite interesting, and had a question regarding the transmission of packets. > >Consider the case when a node transmits a RREQ to it's neighbors. When the neighbors receive the packet and prepare to send it on to their neighbors collisions might occur if they transmit at the same time. Has there been any thought in the group to incorporating some kind of delay scheme to avoid simultaneous transmission following packet reception? My implementation requires the use of a half-duplex RF transceiver, which is why I cannot detect collisions during transmission! > >Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated, > >Jeff Schwentner >> Lockheed Martin Simulation, Training & Support >email: jeffrey.schwentner@lmco.com > > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > Mehran Abolhasan B.E Computer, PhD Research Fellow -- Smart Internet Technology CRC (SITCRC) Telecommunications and IT Research Institute (TITR) University of Wollongong, Northfields Ave, NSW 2522, Australia Phone: +61 2 4221 5491 Fax: +61 2 4221 3277 Email:mehran@titr.uow.edu.au _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 19:14:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA10345 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:14:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoX9T-0001iM-LY for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:13:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i150DpMi006584 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:13:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoX9T-0001i7-Gw for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:13:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA10328 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:13:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoX9R-0004lr-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:13:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoX8Q-0004ea-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:12:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoX7o-0004Xt-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:12:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoX7g-0001OJ-Cs; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:12:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoX7N-0001N0-5E for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:11:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA10243 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:11:36 -0500 (EST) From: mehrana@uow.edu.au Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoX7J-0004W9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:11:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoX6R-0004Qw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:10:43 -0500 Received: from evaki.its.uow.edu.au ([130.130.68.32]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoX5f-0004L8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:09:55 -0500 Received: from evaki (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by evaki.its.uow.edu.au (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1509pOL012643; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:09:51 +1100 (EST) Received: from chac.its.uow.edu.au ([130.130.37.3]) by evaki.its.uow.edu.au (MailMonitor for SMTP v1.2.2 ) ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:09:51 +1100 (EST) Received: from sendmail by chac.its.uow.edu.au with local (Exim 4.30) id 1AoX5a-0006hU-NG; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 11:09:50 +1100 Received: from mirapoint.uow.edu.au (mirapoint.uow.edu.au[130.130.68.27]) by chac.its.uow.edu.au (UWSMTPD 1.6) with ESMTP id 2197948.25546; Thursday, 05 February 2004 11:09:32 +1100 Received: from 203.202.119.24 by mirapoint.uow.edu.au (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.8-GR) with HTTP/1.1; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:09:31 +1100 Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:09:31 +1100 Subject: Re: [manet] DSR RREQ TTL VALUE To: susan rea Cc: manet X-Mailer: Webmail Mirapoint Direct 3.3.8-GR MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="-----b539167633a9b592c0a79266effeb7f0" X-MessageID: 2197948.25546 X-EnvelopeFrom: 2197948.25546 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 -------b539167633a9b592c0a79266effeb7f0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Susan, The RREQ value is usually set at a constant (Max TTL) value. During Route Discovery the source node sets a RREQ packet with a maximum TTL value. Each time the RREQ is rebroadcasted by the intermediate nodes this value is decremented. When the TTL reaches 0, the packet is discarded. The maximum TTL value can also depend on the type of RREQ strategy used. For example, if Expanding Ring Search is used, then the maximum TTL value can be varied by the source node (incremented) each time the route discovery phase fails. The Maximum TTL value set by the source node can also depend on wether the source node has any previous hop information about the destination node. Mehran Abolhasan B.E Computer, PhD Research Fellow -- Smart Internet Technology CRC (SITCRC) Telecommunications and IT Research Institute (TITR) University of Wollongong, Northfields Ave, NSW 2522, Australia Phone: +61 2 4221 5491 Fax: +61 2 4221 3277 www.titr.uow.edu.au/~mehran Email 1: mehrana@uow.edu.au Email 2: mehran@titr.uow.edu.au -------b539167633a9b592c0a79266effeb7f0 Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Message 15" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Message 15" Return-Path: Received: from evaki.its.uow.edu.au (evaki.its.uow.edu.au [130.130.68.32]) by mirapoint.uow.edu.au (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.8-GR) with ESMTP id AFZ05691; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:53:47 +1100 (EST) Received: from evaki (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by evaki.its.uow.edu.au (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i138rkOL024443; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:53:46 +1100 (EST) Received: from chac.its.uow.edu.au ([130.130.37.3]) by evaki.its.uow.edu.au (MailMonitor for SMTP v1.2.2 ) ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:53:46 +1100 (EST) Received: from sendmail by chac.its.uow.edu.au with local (Exim 4.30) id 1AnwJW-00048a-6y; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 19:53:46 +1100 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org[132.151.1.19]) by chac.its.uow.edu.au (UWSMTPD 1.6) with ESMTP id 2056595.15824; Tuesday, 03 February 2004 19:53:40 +1100 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnwIn-0000IG-Vu; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:53:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AnwI0-0000A4-Md for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:52:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA28447 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:52:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwHy-0003B0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:52:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwH1-00036U-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:51:11 -0500 Received: from [157.190.2.57] (helo=mail.cit.ie) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AnwGI-0002xw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:50:26 -0500 Received: from eeb285070069 (unverified [157.190.70.69]) by cit.ie (Rockliffe SMTPRA 5.3.4) with SMTP id for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:41:13 +0000 From: "susan rea" To: "manet" Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:53:34 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=2.60 Subject: [manet] DSR RREQ TTL VALUE Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-MessageID: 2056595.15824 X-EnvelopeFrom: 2056595.15824 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In DSR how is the TTL (hop limit) value of an RREQ packet set? Regards, Susan -------------------Legal Disclaimer--------------------------------------- The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be protected by legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be received by you in error please contact the sender at the above quoted email address. Any unauthorised form of reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the security of any information electronically transmitted and is not liable if the information contained in this communication is not a proper and complete record of the message as transmitted by the sender nor for any delay in its receipt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet -------b539167633a9b592c0a79266effeb7f0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 4 21:15:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13580 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:15:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoZ2U-0000YN-VD for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:14:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i152EkXi002127 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:14:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoZ2U-0000YE-QZ for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:14:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13567 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:14:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoZ2S-0007hs-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:14:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoZ1Y-0007bj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:13:49 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoZ0z-0007Vb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:13:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoZ0o-0000C7-7o; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:13:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AoZ0O-0000Ap-94 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:12:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13484 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:12:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoZ0L-0007UC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:12:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AoYzT-0007PE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:11:40 -0500 Received: from gehenna.ece.cornell.edu ([128.84.95.235]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AoYyr-0007Jv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:11:01 -0500 Received: from verdi (verdi.ece.cornell.edu [128.84.210.27]) by gehenna.ece.cornell.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C17AA1E8004; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:11:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:09:06 -0500 (EST) From: "haas@ece.cornell.edu" To: manet@ietf.org Cc: Zygmunt Haas Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [manet] IWWAN Electronic Submissions Open and New Deadline ... Oulu Finland May 31 - June 3rd 2004] (fwd) Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Call for Papers for Int. Workshop on Wireless Ad-hoc Networks (IWWAN) Oulu, Finland May 31st - June 3rd 2004 The deadline for submissions has been extended to the 15th February. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - The first in a series of workshops on Wireless Ad-hoc Networks will be held in Oulu, Finland from May 31st - June 3rd 2004. This international event i= s technically co-sponsored by IEEE Finland, IEEE Communications Society and the University of Oulu. =20 http://www.cwc.oulu.fi/iwwan2004/index.html Paper Submission deadline : 15th February 2004.=20 The workshops will focus on advances in wireless ad-hoc systems as well as providing a forum for reporting results from European Union projects involving Ad-hoc Wireless (EU Cluster Day). Papers are sought in the following areas Theory=20 * Information theory for wireless ad-hoc networks=20 * Performance bounds, capacity limits=20 * Multiple access techniques and capacity analysis=20 * Capacity of multi-hop networks=20 * Routing strategies in multi-hop networks=20 * Throughput and delay analysis=20 * Heterogeneous Wireless Networks=20 * Clustering and cooperative strategies=20 * Networks for survivability=20 * Power optimisation strategies=20 Applications=20 * Positioning and location capabilities=20 * Performance of mobile IPV6=20 * 802.11 and Bluetooth networks=20 * Interoperation with fixed / cellular networks=20 * Wireless extension of the internet=20 * UWB networks=20 * Test bed performance=20 * Tools for system analysis=20 * Pervasive / ubiquitous systems=20 * Implementation issues=20 * "Value added" services=20 Plenary Speakers ----------------- Joao Da Silva - EU Walter Hirt - IBM, Switzerland Petri M=E4h=F6nen - Aachen University, Germany Kaveh Pahlavan - WPI, USA=20 Lakshman Krishnamurthy - Intel, USA Programme=20 ---------------- Monday - tutorial on Ad-hoc, Multi-hop networks Tuesday - regular sessions Wednesday - regular sessions=20 Thursday - EU Cluster Day=20 The EU cluster day will include presentations from 6-HOP, ROMATIK, BROADWA= Y and EYES from the EU 5th Framework projects. A banquet is planned for Tuesday evening. Important Dates ----------------- Submission Deadline - 31st January Acceptance Decisions - 31st March Camera Ready Copies Due - 30th April Tutorial - 31st May Conference Dates - 1/2/3 June EU Cluster Day - 3rd June Please see the WWW site for more information or contact me directly http://www.cwc.oulu.fi/iwwan2004/index.html Best wishes Dr. Ian Oppermann Director, CWC Oulu Mobile +358 40 707 6344 Fax +358 8 553 2845 P.O. Box 4500 FIN-90014 University of Oulu, Finland _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 5 08:02:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14142 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:02:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aoj91-0000gJ-GY for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:02:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i15D2BfN002608 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:02:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aoj90-0000fz-LK for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:02:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14136 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:02:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoj8z-000469-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:02:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoj7t-00040K-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:01:02 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoj7N-0003v0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:00:29 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aoj72-0000J9-O1; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:00:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aoj6r-0000Gq-4M for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:59:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14054 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 07:59:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoj6q-0003u2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:59:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoj5y-0003p7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:59:03 -0500 Received: from iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.10.81]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoj5T-0003jq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:58:31 -0500 Received: from irams1.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.10.5] helo=irams1.ira.uka.de) by iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #10 (Debian)) id 1Aoj5P-0002tR-00; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:58:27 +0100 Received: from i72tribble.tm.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.71.8] helo=tribble ident=weniger) by irams1.ira.uka.de with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #7 ) id 1Aoj5O-0004Ju-00; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:58:26 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Kilian Weniger Organization: University of Karlsruhe To: idc@cs.ucsb.edu, manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Loops in AODV due to seqno wrap-arounds? Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:58:25 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 References: <200402041502.27909.weniger@tm.uka.de> <16417.11465.688710.612870@gargle.gargle.HOWL> In-Reply-To: <16417.11465.688710.612870@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Cc: stanze@tm.uka.de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200402051358.25893.weniger@tm.uka.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Ian, Am Mittwoch, 4. Februar 2004 18:32 schrieb Ian Chakeres: > How would you suggest to handle this situation? Or what is a better > way to perform DSN wrap-around? A possible solution could be, that node A synchronizes DSN_A(C) with DSN_= C(C)=20 from time to time (e.g. once per day), so that the difference of DSN_A(C)= and=20 DSN_C(C) never grows larger than MAX_VALUE/2. Unfortunately, this would=20 require some minor changes to AODV: If a node would maintain a sequence number sync timer (SN_SYNC) per activ= e=20 route, it could issue a RREQ (with "D"-flag set) for C if the timer expir= es.=20 Because the route exists and is active, the RREQ can even be send hop-by-= hop=20 per unicast to C to save bandwidth (hop-by-hop to establish reverse-path)= =2E If=20 node A receives the RREP from C, DSN_A(C) will be equal to DSN_C(C) and t= he=20 problem is solved. If node A does not receive a RREP(because RREQ/RREP go= t=20 lost), node A invalidates the route to C and starts a normal RREQ procedu= re=20 (with "D"-flag set). SN_SYNC must be choosen small enough to prevent a difference of MAX_VALUE= /2. If SN_SYNC is one day, node C could send RREQs at the maximum RREQ_RATELI= MIT=20 and RREPs at the rate of about 25.000 per second (assuming that it increa= ses=20 the SN by one for each RREP). A RREP_RATELIMIT could be useful to have an= =20 upper bound for the maximum possible SN incrementation per second.=20 Another very simple (but not very nice) solution could be, that node C re= boots=20 in case of a wrap-around.... Kilian Weniger, Oliver Stanze > > >Kilian Weniger wrote: > >Hi, > > > >we encountered a (admittedly very rare) scenario with AODV, which we t= hink > > may result in permanent loops in case a sequence number wrap-around > > occurs. > > > >In the following, we describe the scenario. We denote a DSN for node C= at > > node A with DSN_A(C). > >The maximum possible value of the sequence number is denoted by MAX_VA= LUE. > > > > > >.. - A - B - C - .. - D > > > > > >1. A has an active route to C > >2. DSN_A(C) < MAX_VALUE/2 > >3. D has an active route to C, which breaks frequently -> D issues RRE= Qs > > and DSN_C(C) increases permanently > >4. A does not receive the RREQs -> DSN_A(C) does not change (still sma= ller > >than MAX_VALUE/2) > >5. B knows current DSN of C (DSN_B(C)=3D=3DDSN_C(C)) because of receiv= ed RREQs > > or Hellos > >6. Wrap-around of DSN_C(C) occurs -> 0 < DSN_C(C) < DSN_A(C) < MAX_VAL= UE/2 > >with DSN_B(C)=3D=3DDSN_C(C) > >7. New node E joins MANET and issues RREQ for C. > > > >The scenario is now as follows: > > > > > > E > > / \ > >.. - A - B - C - .. - D > > > > > >8. E receives RREP from A and B and chooses A as next hop because DSN_= A(C) > > > DSN_B(C) > >9. Link B->C breaks and B issues RREQ for C. > >10. B receives RREP only from E, because A did not receive the RREQ (o= r > > A's RREP got lost), e.g., due to MAC layer collisions > >11. B chooses E as next hop, because DSN_E(C) > DSN_B(C) -> Loop A-B-E > > > > > >Our questions are: > > > >Is our conclusion correct? > > > >If so, is the scenario relevant enough in practice to be considered? > > > >Think of A, B, C as static nodes, e.g., because they are internet > >gateways, which are connected via ad hoc links. Node D (and others) ar= e > > mobile nodes, so that link breaks occur frequently. > > > >An incrementation of the DSN_C(C) by MAX_VALUE/2 with MAX_VALUE=3D2^32= -1 > > takes at least MAX_VALUE/2*RREQ_RATE_LIMIT=3D~6.8 years per route to = C, if > > the SN is increased by one each time. With 100 routes to C, it takes = at > > least ~24 days. According to RFC 3561 section 6.3 ("...which is > > incremented prior..."), it not forbidden to increase the SN by more t= han > > one before sending a RREQ. Thus, it may take a much shorter time span= , > > depending on the implementation. > > > >If the scenario is relevant, shouldn't wrap-arounds better be handled > >differently in a future version of AODV? > > > > > >Best regards, > > > > > >Kilian Weniger, Oliver Stanze > > > >-- > >Dipl.-Ing. Kilian Weniger > >Institute of Telematics, Universitaet Karlsruhe (TH) > >Zirkel 2, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany > >Email: weniger@tm.uka.de, HP: http://www.tm.uka.de/~weniger > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >manet mailing list > >manet@ietf.org > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet --=20 Dipl.-Ing. Kilian Weniger=09 Institute of Telematics, Universitaet Karlsruhe (TH) Zirkel 2, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany Phone: +49 721 608 6415, Fax: +49 721 388097 Email: weniger@tm.uka.de, HP: http://www.tm.uka.de/~weniger _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 5 08:34:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14835 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:34:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aojdt-0002n7-Qd for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:34:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i15DY50M010729 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:34:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aojdt-0002my-JP for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:34:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14818 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:34:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aojds-0006qu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:34:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aojcu-0006ka-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:33:05 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AojcB-0006ef-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:32:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aojbt-0002UI-Af; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:32:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aojbo-0002TU-1f for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:31:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14784 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 08:31:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aojbm-0006dc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:31:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aojao-0006Yw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:30:54 -0500 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk ([130.225.194.6] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aoja4-0006Ul-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:30:08 -0500 Received: from armada (voop@borg.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.22]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i15DU4cC029611; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 14:30:05 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 14:30:04 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: Joe Macker Cc: manet@ietf.org, fenner@research.att.com, zinin@psg.com Subject: Re: [manet] Possible no MANET meeting in Seoul Message-Id: <20040205143004.765017f6.ietflists@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20040203120350.02910b40@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> References: <6.0.0.22.2.20040203120350.02910b40@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joe, Scott, MANET'ers, It's regrettable that neither you nor Scott will be able to make it to Seoul. However I think it would still be beneficial to have a meeting, if we could get one or both of the AD's to chair: the WG is currently in a phase of transition, and I think that it might be usefull to still have a meeting/discussion regarding future directions. As others have said on the list, there are a number of topics which might be of relevance.... So I would root for still trying to have a meeting -- possibly a short one? --thomas On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:22 -0500 Joe Macker wrote: > MANETers: > > Scott Corson and I (WG chairs) cannot attend the Seoul meeting and are > recommended we skip this round and concentrate on firming up next step > action items on the mailing list. > > If enough participants feel there should be a meeting with specific > agenda items the ADs could possibly host a short meeting. > > -Joe > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 5 13:50:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28544 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:50:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AooZu-0006y7-Mp for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:50:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i15IoIoU026781 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:50:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AooZu-0006xs-I3 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:50:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28479 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:50:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AooZs-0000LD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:50:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AooYp-0000EN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:49:12 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AooXu-00007n-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:48:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AooXh-0006Kx-Ak; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:48:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AooWr-0006JL-Cq for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:47:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28266 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:47:07 -0500 (EST) From: crentel@sce.carleton.ca Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AooWp-0007nc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:47:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AooVx-0007hx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:46:13 -0500 Received: from sangam.sce.carleton.ca ([134.117.4.4]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AooV7-0007c7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:45:21 -0500 Received: from localhost (webmail.sce.carleton.ca [134.117.4.46]) by sangam.sce.carleton.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i15IjJxf026663 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:45:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from wmc-07.sce.carleton.ca (wmc-07.sce.carleton.ca [134.117.61.167]) by webmail.sce.carleton.ca (IMP) with HTTP for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:46:57 -0500 Message-ID: <1076006817.40228fa1c7571@webmail.sce.carleton.ca> Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:46:57 -0500 To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [manet] tx-rx turn aorund times for 802.11 NICs Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello, Is anyone aware of a value for tx-rx turnaround times for 802.11b NICs in the market?, where can I find that info? etc...(the standrad specifies 10 usecs, but wanted to know measure values for on-the-market NICs) Thanks Carlos _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 04:25:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA17614 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 04:25:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap2E0-0003cA-6v for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:24:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i169OaVI013888 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 04:24:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap2Dz-0003bv-9w for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:24:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA17610 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 04:24:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap2Dw-0006RF-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:24:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap2D0-0006P2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:23:35 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap2Ch-0006My-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:23:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap2CV-0003LY-7r; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:23:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap2C1-0003I5-Ub for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:22:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA17588 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 04:22:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap2Bz-0006ML-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:22:31 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap2B1-0006Kg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:21:31 -0500 Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap2AS-0006HQ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:20:56 -0500 Received: from zephyrin (byzantium.inria.fr [128.93.17.6]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id i169KOf23038; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:20:25 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <000201c3ec92$a860c380$1f175d80@inria.fr> From: "Philippe Jacquet" To: "Schwentner, Jeffrey" , References: Subject: Re: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 16:31:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_12_24 autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Jeff, If the MAC layer provides its service in "best effort" (like with CSMA-CA), it is preferable not to stress the link layer. Why not you use a random time jitter before retransmission? Tests show significant reduction in collision rate when flooding are too frequent. There is no need to implement it at low level. We have specified a time jitter in OLSR RFC, but there are many other equivalent way and I don't see any problem to adapt them to AODV implementation. Best regards, Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: Schwentner, Jeffrey To: Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 10:59 PM Subject: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance > I am working on a project which requires a very low-level implementation of an Ad-Hoc routing mechanism. I found the AODV concept to be quite interesting, and had a question regarding the transmission of packets. > > Consider the case when a node transmits a RREQ to it's neighbors. When the neighbors receive the packet and prepare to send it on to their neighbors collisions might occur if they transmit at the same time. Has there been any thought in the group to incorporating some kind of delay scheme to avoid simultaneous transmission following packet reception? My implementation requires the use of a half-duplex RF transceiver, which is why I cannot detect collisions during transmission! > > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated, > > Jeff Schwentner > > Lockheed Martin Simulation, Training & Support > email: jeffrey.schwentner@lmco.com > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 06:52:08 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA21853 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:52:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap4WM-0006Ze-NM for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:51:43 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16Bpg0b025264 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:51:42 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap4WM-0006ZP-IA for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:51:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA21838 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:51:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap4WI-0006Hn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:51:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap4VT-0006ET-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:50:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap4Ur-0006Be-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:50:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap4Um-0006GA-2r; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:50:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap4UP-0006Eu-9v for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:49:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA21792 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:49:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap4UL-0006Ae-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:49:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap4TT-00068O-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:48:43 -0500 Received: from ece.iisc.ernet.in ([144.16.64.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap4St-000621-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:48:08 -0500 Received: from ece.iisc.ernet.in (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ece.iisc.ernet.in (8.12.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i16Bv39U075075 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:27:03 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost (nandini@localhost) by ece.iisc.ernet.in (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with ESMTP id i16Bv39w075072 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:27:03 +0530 (IST) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:27:03 +0530 (IST) From: Nandini To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] 802.11 Cards Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 I would like to know of any 802.11 cards in the market whose firmware code can be tinkered with. Typically, I should be able to alter the parameters contention window, RTS/CTS logic and other features of 802.11 protocol. Would be very grateful if you could suggest any useful pointers in this direction. Would also appreciate information about signing of NDA to this effect or payment of money. Thanks Nandini _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 08:29:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25338 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:29:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap62E-0005Cd-Tq for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:28:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16DSgH1019993 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:28:42 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap62E-0005CO-K2 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:28:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25320 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:28:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap62D-0004e3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:28:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap61H-0004ac-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:27:44 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap60o-0004YD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:27:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap60b-0004j1-Vy; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:27:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap60K-0004ie-E2 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:26:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25268 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:26:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap60J-0004Xd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:26:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap5zQ-0004VF-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:25:49 -0500 Received: from [202.84.232.68] (helo=mail.aitlbd.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap5z1-0004SU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:25:24 -0500 Received: from p6.aitlbd.net (p6.aitlbd.net [202.84.231.6]) by mail.aitlbd.net (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i16DFLe23625 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 19:15:21 +0600 (GMT) From: merajul Organization: BUET To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 19:27:28 +0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307141927.28477.merajul@aitlbd.net> AFTAB-IT-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Simulation of Leader election algorithm in NS2 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi! I want to simulate a leader election algorithm in a region of mibile nodes. Each node has a battery-power and the node with maximum power is the leader also called VBS ( Virtual Base Staton ) . Which things I need to know to simulate it in MANET ? Has anyone done any simulation in NS2 for this algorithm ? Thanks -- Mohammad Merajul Islam Molla Department of Computer Science & Engineering ( Final Year ) Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology (BUET) Dhaka, Bangladesh. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by AFTAB IT MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 08:30:20 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25427 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:30:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap63M-0005Px-86 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:29:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16DTqRd020818 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:29:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap63M-0005Ph-3K for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:29:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25388 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:29:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap63K-0004lQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:29:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap62Q-0004g1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:28:55 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap61a-0004bq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:28:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap61Z-0004yZ-QI; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap61G-0004nj-Cr for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:27:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25300 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 08:27:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap61F-0004aA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:27:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap60G-0004XG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:26:40 -0500 Received: from [202.84.232.68] (helo=mail.aitlbd.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap5zK-0004SU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:25:43 -0500 Received: from p6.aitlbd.net (p6.aitlbd.net [202.84.231.6]) by mail.aitlbd.net (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i16DFGe23609 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 19:15:17 +0600 (GMT) From: merajul Organization: BUET To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 19:27:23 +0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307141927.23573.merajul@aitlbd.net> AFTAB-IT-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Video conferencing in MANET Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi ! What types of works have been done for vedio conferencing in MANET ? Is there any approach for PA-VBS ( power-aware virtual base station ) selection in a region of mobile nodes ? What types of QoS and admission controller mechanism have been developed for video ( multimedia data) transmission ? Is there any standard protocol for Video conferencing ? -- Mohammad Merajul Islam Molla Department of Computer Science & Engineering ( Final Year ) Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology (BUET) Dhaka, Bangladesh. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by AFTAB IT MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 09:19:16 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26314 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:19:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap6oe-0008NM-FR for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:18:48 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16EIihv032196 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:18:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap6oe-0008ND-BB for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:18:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26303 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:18:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap6oc-00077M-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:18:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap6nf-00074u-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:17:44 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap6n7-00072b-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:17:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap6mz-0007wj-Jr; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:17:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap6mo-0007wF-9E for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:16:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26283 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:16:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap6mm-00072F-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:16:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap6lr-0006zb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:15:52 -0500 Received: from mail.ee.gatech.edu ([130.207.225.105]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap6lc-0006wU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:15:36 -0500 Received: from yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu (yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu [130.207.232.10]) by mail.ee.gatech.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i16EFJoN008436 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:15:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (jau@localhost) by yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu (8.12.0.Beta19/8.12.0.Beta19/Submit) with ESMTP id i16EF8Ob016157 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:15:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:15:08 -0500 (EST) From: Jaudelice Cavalcante de Oliveira To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-SPAM: NO Subject: [manet] MedHocNet'04 CFP Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR autolearn=no version=2.60 My sincere apologies if you have received multiple copies of this message. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Med-Hoc-Net 2004 ================ The Third Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop June 27-30, 2004, Bodrum, Turkey http://www.medhoc04.diit.unict.it/ Call for Papers --------------- Ad hoc network applications are emerging continuously imposing their own stringent constraints which cannot be fulfilled by generic approaches and thus spur new research efforts. The aim of Med-Hoc-Net 2004 is to serve as a platform for researchers and visionaries from academia, research labs, and industry from all over the globe to share their ideas, views, results, and experiences in the field of ad-hoc networking and communications. Med-Hoc-Net 2004 will include presentations of theoretical and experimental achievements, innovative ad-hoc systems, prototyping efforts, case studies, and advancements in technology directly affecting ad-hoc networking and communications infrastructures. After Sardinia (Italy) and Mahdia (Tunisia), this year the workshop will take place in another beautiful spot on the Mediterranean Sea: Bodrum (Turkey) where you will find wonderful nature and amazing historical sites close to hand. Bodrum is easy to reach via frequent flight connections from Istanbul. Topics of Interest: ------------------- The papers solicited in Med-Hoc-Net 2004 cover a variety of topics including but not limited to: - Novel ad-hoc network architectures and applications, - Sensor network applications and protocols, - Implementations, testbeds, and prototypes, - Interfacing ad-hoc systems with different networks, - Resource discovery and management, - Power management and control, - Call admission and traffic shaping policies for ad-hoc networks, - Multimedia location services, - Self organization and network reconfiguration, - Protocols for QoS support in ad-hoc networks, - QoS support in Bluetooth, HIPERLAN, IEEE 802.11, etc., - MAC protocols, scheduling, and radio resource sharing in ad hoc networks, - Unicast and multicast routing algorithms and protocols, - Transport layer protocols for multi-hop networks, - Congestion control, - Performance evaluation of ad-hoc network protocols through simulations, analysis, and measurements, - Security in ad-hoc networks, - Fault tolerance and error recovery - Signal processing algorithms (coding, compression) for ad-hoc networks The program committee will referee all papers, and accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings. PAPERS OF PARTICULAR MERIT WILL BE PUBLISHED IN AD HOC NETWORKS (ELSEVIER) JOURNAL. Submission and Important Dates: ------------------------------- Manuscripts must be formatted according to the IEEE double-column standard format, except the font size, which must be 11pt. Authors should use only standard fonts, i.e., Times Roman, Courier, Symbol, and Helvetica, or their equivalent. The maximum length of the manuscript is 12 (double-column) pages. Papers should be submitted in pdf or ps format via email to medhoc04@diit.unict.it according to the following timetable: Full Paper Electronic Submission: March 2, 2004 Notification of Acceptance/Rejection: May 3, 2004 Camera ready submission of full papers: May 17, 2004 Tutorial date: June 27, 2004 Conference dates: June 28-30, 2004 Keynote Speakers: ----------------- Leonard Kleinrock (UCLA, USA), and Imrich Chlamtac (UTDallas, USA). Steering Committee: ------------------- Khaldoun Al Agha (LRI, France), Mario Gerla (UCLA, USA), Farouk Kamoun (ENSI, Tunisia), Giovanni Pau (UCLA, USA), and Guy Pujolle (LIP6, France). Organization Committee: ----------------------- General Chair: Ian F. Akyildiz, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA General Vice Chair: Erdal Cayirci, Istanbul Technical University, TURKEY Technical Program Chairs: Giacomo Morabito, University of Catania, ITALY Eylem Ekici, Ohio State University, USA Tutorial Chairs: Francesca Cuomo, University of Rome - La Sapienza, ITALY Christos Douligeris, University of Piraeus, GREECE Publicity Chairs: Buyurman Baykal, Middle East Technical University, TURKEY Jaudelice Cavalcante de Oliveira, Drexel University, USA Registration Chair: Sebnem Baydere, Yeditepe University, TURKEY Technical Program Committee: ---------------------------- Khaldoun Al Agha, Laboratoire de Recherche en Informatique, FRANCE Hamid Aghvami, King's College London, UK Eitan Altman, INRIA, FRANCE Roberto Battiti, University of Trento, ITALY Raouf Boutaba, University of Waterloo, CANADA Walid Dabbous, INRIA, FRANCE Magda El Zarki, University of California at Irvine, USA Luigi Fratta, Politecnico di Milano, ITALY Mario Gerla, UCLA, USA Paul J. M. Havinga, University of Twente, NETHERLANDS Farouk Kamoun, ENSI, TUNISIA Holger Karl, Technical University of Berlin, GERMANY Ulf Korner, Lund Institute of Technology, SWEDEN Bhaskar Krishnamachari, University of Southern California, USA Marwan Krunz, University of Arizona, USA Albert Levi, Sabanci University, TURKEY Janise McNair, University of Florida, USA Lazaros Merakos, University of Athens, GREECE Ioanis Nikolaidis, University of Alberta, CANADA Ariel Orda, Technion, ISRAEL Sergio Palazzo, University of Catania, ITALY Giovanni Pau, UCLA, USA Chiara Petrioli, University of Rome "La Sapienza", ITALY Andreas Pitsillides, University of Cyprus, CYPRUS Guy Pujolle, LIP6, FRANCE Paolo Santi, CNR, ITALY Adrian Segall, Technion, ISRAEL Ness Shroff, Purdue University, USA Moshe Sidi, Technion, ISRAEL Raghupathy Sivakumar, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA Ioannis Stavrakakis, University of Athens, GREECE Ivan Stojmenovic, University of Ottawa, CANADA Violet R. Syrotiuk, Arizona State University, USA Leandros Tassiulas, University of Thessaly, GREECE Bernhard H. Walke, Aachen University of Technology, GERMANY Wenye Wang, North Carolina State University, USA Michele Zorzi, University of Ferrara, ITALY -------------------------------------------------- For more information on the workshop, please check http://www.medhoc04.diit.unict.it/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 09:52:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26878 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:52:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7Kb-0001qX-Fa for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:51:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16Epj6o007091 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:51:45 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7Kb-0001qI-8x for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:51:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26859 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:51:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7KZ-0000qC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:51:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7Jd-0000nQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:50:46 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7JA-0000l4-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:50:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7Iy-0001YZ-2X; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:50:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7Ie-0001XA-Ac for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:49:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26833 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:49:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7Ic-0000k5-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:49:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7Hf-0000hW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:48:43 -0500 Received: from musenki.com ([192.207.126.3] helo=netgate.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7Gi-0000cw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:47:44 -0500 Received: from localhost. (home [216.229.180.90]) by netgate.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D193F4021; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:46:53 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Thompson MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16419.43229.512127.965848@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:46:53 -0800 To: Nandini Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] 802.11 Cards In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.4 (patch 12) "Portable Code" XEmacs Lucid Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nandini writes: > > > I would like to know of any 802.11 cards in the market whose > firmware code can be tinkered with. Typically, I should be able to > alter the parameters contention window, RTS/CTS logic and other > features of 802.11 protocol. None. There are several cards in the market that don't have firmware, however. Atheros is one well-known one. -- "Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." -- Aldous Huxley (1894 - 1963) _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 10:05:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28613 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:05:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7XP-0005rL-Eg for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:04:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16F4xXo022516 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:04:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7XP-0005r5-As for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:04:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28537 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:04:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7XN-0002cB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:04:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7WT-0002Wj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:04:02 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7Vh-0002RP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:03:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7VW-0004oH-9Z; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:03:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap7VP-0004jT-Le for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:02:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28241 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:02:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7VN-0002QK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:02:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7UQ-0002M6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:01:55 -0500 Received: from mailgw2a.lmco.com ([192.91.147.7]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap7Tb-0002II-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:01:03 -0500 Received: from emss03g01.ems.lmco.com (relay3.ems.lmco.com [141.240.4.144]) by mailgw2a.lmco.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i16F0xQv018538 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:00:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.lmco.com by lmco.com (PMDF V6.1-1X6 #30875) id <0HSO004014DNXO@lmco.com> for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:00:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from EMSS03I00.us.lmco.com ([141.240.31.211]) by lmco.com (PMDF V6.1-1X6 #30875) with ESMTP id <0HSO0082Q4DMB2@lmco.com> for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:00:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from EMSS03M06.us.lmco.com ([166.27.250.213]) by EMSS03I00.us.lmco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:00:58 -0500 Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:00:58 -0500 From: "Schwentner, Jeffrey" Subject: RE: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance To: manet@ietf.org Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-Topic: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance Thread-Index: AcPsknWIuTJS7IOkTxKFR7J7q/ZeuAAJaarg content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Feb 2004 15:00:58.0089 (UTC) FILETIME=[06F2C590:01C3ECC2] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Philippe, I think that is my fundamental problem, I have no MAC or Link Layer. I am using a simple transceiver (Half-Duplex) and a microcontroller with limited resources. I will have to implement a collision avoidance mechanism directly. I think my best approach is to adopt the 802.11 CSMA-CA implementation, ultimately incorporating some random back off time. Thanks for the input. Regards, Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Philippe Jacquet [mailto:philippe.jacquet@inria.fr] Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 10:31 AM To: Schwentner, Jeffrey; manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance Hi, Jeff, If the MAC layer provides its service in "best effort" (like with CSMA-CA), it is preferable not to stress the link layer. Why not you use a random time jitter before retransmission? Tests show significant reduction in collision rate when flooding are too frequent. There is no need to implement it at low level. We have specified a time jitter in OLSR RFC, but there are many other equivalent way and I don't see any problem to adapt them to AODV implementation. Best regards, Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: Schwentner, Jeffrey To: Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 10:59 PM Subject: [manet] AODV Collision Avoidance > I am working on a project which requires a very low-level implementation of an Ad-Hoc routing mechanism. I found the AODV concept to be quite interesting, and had a question regarding the transmission of packets. > > Consider the case when a node transmits a RREQ to it's neighbors. When the neighbors receive the packet and prepare to send it on to their neighbors collisions might occur if they transmit at the same time. Has there been any thought in the group to incorporating some kind of delay scheme to avoid simultaneous transmission following packet reception? My implementation requires the use of a half-duplex RF transceiver, which is why I cannot detect collisions during transmission! > > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated, > > Jeff Schwentner > > Lockheed Martin Simulation, Training & Support > email: jeffrey.schwentner@lmco.com > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 11:24:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA03110 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 11:24:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap8lk-0007US-A4 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:23:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16GNqK9028788 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 11:23:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap8lk-0007UF-5P for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:23:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA03101 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 11:23:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap8lj-000040-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:23:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap8kn-00000H-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:22:53 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap8k8-0007l3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:22:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap8jx-00071j-Bg; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:22:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ap8jn-0006zO-Lw for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:21:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA03083 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 11:21:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap8jm-0007kP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:21:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap8io-0007hZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:20:50 -0500 Received: from [200.51.80.3] (helo=TDIMSO14.backend.tdata.com.ar) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ap8iE-0007cM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:20:15 -0500 Received: from gglaptopxp (200-42-23-149.dup.prima.net.ar [200.42.23.149]) by TDIMSO14.backend.tdata.com.ar (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 1 (built Aug 19 2002)) with ESMTPA id <0HSO008MN84DVA@TDIMSO14.backend.tdata.com.ar> for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:21:52 -0300 (GMT) Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:19:41 -0300 From: Guichal Guillermo Subject: FW: [manet] 802.11 Cards To: manet@ietf.org Message-id: <001101c3eccd$074f6380$c800000a@gglaptopxp> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I had plans to build an 802 card for embedded applications and research. My idea was to try to use only dedicated ICs for the RF front end and try to implement the other layers (that would be nice to tinker with) in FPGAs/uC. I even requested sample ICs for some 802.11 chipsets. My idea was to maybe put an FPGA between the RF front end and MAC layer chips (it would help to use a 2 or 3-IC chipset for this), so one could select to use the standard implementation and just use the FPGA as a wire or filter and change stuff going from one to the other, even implement a whole, higher level stack on the FPGA / uC. That would give you something where you could have manet protcols running directly or mixed within 802.11. Well, I never got around to working on that, and now I'm working and really can't find the time to work on a cool project like that. I think it would make a great project for an MS thesis or two. If anybody is interested feel free to contact me and I'll help you in whatever I can (If anybody would like to finance such a project please you are welcome to contact me also :). I did my MS at Ga Tech on manets but I'm working mostly on embedded sytstem design now, using FPGAs and uC. Guillermo Guichal, MS Embedded Systems Design Consultant Professor, UTN Alvarado 450 7"A" 8000 Bahia Blanca Pcia Bs As ARGENTINA Voice: +54 291 452-3700 Mobile: +54 291 15-406-2063 E-mail: gguichal@ieee.org > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Jim Thompson > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 11:47 AM > To: Nandini > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [manet] 802.11 Cards > > > > Nandini writes: > > > > > > I would like to know of any 802.11 cards in the market > whose firmware > > code can be tinkered with. Typically, I should be able to alter the > > parameters contention window, RTS/CTS logic and other features of > > 802.11 protocol. > > None. > > There are several cards in the market that don't have > firmware, however. Atheros is one well-known one. > > -- > "Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." > -- Aldous Huxley (1894 - 1963) > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 13:05:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA07525 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:05:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApALT-0007gN-V5 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:04:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16I4pxE029530 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:04:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApALT-0007gD-Oq for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:04:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA07500 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:04:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApALR-0007MK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:04:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApAKY-0007J8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:03:55 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApAJo-0007G6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:03:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApAJh-0007Ew-5E; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:03:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApAJc-0007ER-Ga for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:02:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA07427 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:02:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApAJa-0007Es-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:02:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApAIf-0007BT-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:01:58 -0500 Received: from dcs-server2.cs.uiuc.edu ([128.174.252.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApAI2-000780-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:01:19 -0500 Received: from brooklyn (brooklyn.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.244.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by dcs-server2.cs.uiuc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i16I1FZP001140 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 12:01:15 -0600 (CST) From: "Robin Kravets" To: Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 12:03:14 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] ACM MobiCom 2004 CFP Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We apologize in advance if you receive multiple copies of this CFP. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- =20 CALL FOR PAPERS =20 MobiCom 2004 The Tenth Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking =20 September 26 - October 1, 2004 Philadelphia, PA, USA (dates and location are subject to final approval) http://www.sigmobile.org/mobicom/2004/ Sponsored by ACM SIGMOBILE IMPORTANT DATES: Paper registrations due: March 8, 2004 Paper submissions due: March 15, 2004 Notification of acceptance: June 21, 2004 Camera-ready versions due: July 25, 2004 =20 ACM MobiCom 2004, the Tenth Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, is the tenth in the series of annual = conferences sponsored by ACM SIGMOBILE and dedicated to addressing the challenges in = the areas of mobile computing and wireless and mobile networking. The = MobiCom conference series serves as the premier international forum addressing networks, systems, algorithms, and applications that support the = symbiosis of mobile computers and wireless networks. MobiCom is a highly = selective, single-track conference focusing on all issues in mobile computing and wireless and mobile networking at the link layer and above. =20 PAPERS: Authors are invited to submit full papers presenting new = research related to the theory or practice of mobile computing and networking. = All submissions must describe original research that is not published or currently under review by another conference or journal. Areas of = interest include, but are not limited to: - Applications and computing services supporting mobile users - Architectures, protocols, and algorithms to cope with mobility, limited bandwidth, or intermittent connectivity - Database and data management issues in mobile computing - Operating system and middleware support for mobile computing and=20 networking - Distributed systems aspects of mobile computing - New mobile and wireless applications - Integration and interworking of wired and wireless networks=09 - Performance of mobile and wireless networks and systems=20 - Location-dependent applications and protocols - Security and privacy of mobile/wireless systems - Mobile ad hoc and sensor networks - Wireless multimedia systems - Algorithms and protocols for power management and control - Service creation and management environments for mobile/wireless systems =20 The program committee will referee all papers, and accepted papers will = be published in the conference proceedings. Selected papers will appear in = a special issue of the ACM/Kluwer Wireless Networks (WINET) journal. =20 CHALLENGES PAPERS: The conference also solicits short papers (maximum of = 8 pages) that challenge the mobile computing community with revolutionary = new approaches, new technologies, or visionary applications. Such papers = should provide stimulating ideas or grand visions that may open up exciting = avenues of far-reaching future research. Descriptions of new products or simple evolution of existing work are not appropriate as Challenges Papers. Challenges Papers will be reviewed and should be submitted using the = normal submission procedure. The title of such papers must start with the word "Challenges," i.e., "Challenges: ... `rest of the title'." =20 SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: All paper submissions will be handled electronically. Authors should prepare a PDF or a PostScript version of their full paper. Papers must be no longer than 15 pages (8 pages for Challenges submissions), font size not smaller than 10 points, and must = fit properly on U.S. "letter"-sized paper (8.5x11 inches) with reasonable margins. Detailed instructions for the paper submission procedure and = format will be available on the conference web pages. The deadline for = registering the title and the abstract of the paper with our electronic submission system is March 8, 2004 and the deadline for submitting the actual paper = is March 15, 2004. All deadlines are 11:59PM EST. All submitted papers will be judged based on their quality through double-blind review process, where the identities of the authors are withheld from the reviewers. Authors should not be identifiable by any = means from the paper or from the PDF or the Postscript file. Guidelines for preparing the paper for blind reviewing, as well as electronic paper submission instructions, will be available on the conference web pages. Submitted or substantially similar papers must not be currently under = review for any other publication. Please direct any questions regarding paper submission to the Program Co-Chairs, Samir Das and Ravi Jain at mobicom_pcchairs@acm.org. =20 TUTORIALS: Proposals for tutorials are solicited. Evaluation of tutorial proposals will be based on the expertise and experience of the = instructors and on the relevance of the subject matter. Potential instructors are requested to submit a tutorial proposal of at most 5 pages, including a biographical sketch, to the Tutorial Co-Chairs, Andrew Campbell (campbell@ee.columbia.edu) and Taieb Znati (tznati@nsf.gov). The = deadline for tutorial proposals is April 05, 2004. =20 PANELS: Panel proposals are solicited that examine innovative, controversial, or otherwise provocative issues of interest. Panel = proposals should not exceed 3 pages, including biographical sketches of the = panelists. Potential panel organizers should contact the Panel Co-Chairs, Prathima Agrawal (pagrawal@eng.auburn.edu) and Tao Zhang (tao@research.telcordia.com). The deadline for panel proposals is April = 26, 2004. =20 RESEARCH DEMOS AND EXHIBITS: Proposals for research demos are solicited. Proposals should not exceed 3 pages and should include a description of = the demo and equipment to be used. Send proposals to the Research Demo = Chair, Elizabeth Belding-Royer (ebelding@cs.ucsb.edu). The deadline for demo proposals is July 12, 2004. We are also planning an Expo featuring = exhibits of the latest mobile computing products and services. STUDENT POSTER SESSION: Student posters are solicited that present = recent and on-going research by students on mobile computing and mobile and wireless networking topics. Student posters should not exceed 2 pages = and should include a description of the student's research. See above for = paper formatting requirements. Accepted posters will be put on the conference = web page; however, they will not be printed in the conference proceedings. = Send poster submissions to the Student Poster Co-Chairs, Chiara Petrioli (petrioli@di.uniroma1.it) and Stefano Basagni (basagni@ece.neu.edu). The deadline for student posters is July 12, 2004. BEST STUDENT PAPER AWARD: Papers with a student as a primary author will = be considered for the Best Student Paper Award, with a cash award of 1000 = USD. Students must indicate with their submission that they would like to be considered for this award. The student author of the awarded paper is expected to present the paper at the conference. =20 GENERAL CHAIR Zygmunt Haas Cornell University =20 PROGRAM CO-CHAIRS Samir R. Das Stony Brook University, SUNY =20 Ravi Jain DoCoMo USA Labs STEERING COMMITTEE CHAIR Imrich Chlamtac University of Texas at Dallas ACM PROGRAM DIRECTOR Ginger Ignatoff Additional committee members will be announced on the conference web = page. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 14:54:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA12024 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:54:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApC3A-0008Ah-BD for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:54:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16Js4Yk031405 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:54:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApC3A-0008AS-7E for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:54:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA11992 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:54:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApC37-00077b-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:54:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApC29-00073D-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:53:02 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApC1P-0006zX-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:52:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApC1C-0007eD-5Y; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:52:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApC17-0007dO-F0 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:51:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA11932 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:51:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApC14-0006yQ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:51:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApC08-0006vB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:50:56 -0500 Received: from pony1pub.arc.nasa.gov ([128.102.31.41]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApBzH-0006pS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:50:03 -0500 Received: from nren-194.arc.nasa.gov ([128.102.196.194] verified) by pony1pub.arc.nasa.gov (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 7261679 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:49:33 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jerry Toung Reply-To: jtoung@arc.nasa.gov To: manet@ietf.org Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 11:48:18 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200402061148.18536.jtoung@arc.nasa.gov> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] DSR, source route question Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello everybody, another question about dsr source route. Let's assume the following graph= : I have read paragraphs 8.1.4, 8.1.5 and 3.3.2 before. =09S-----------A-----------B-----------------C =09|=09=09|=09=09|=09=09=09| =09|=09=09|=09=09|=09=09=09| =09F-----------G=09=09+-----------------D-------------E =09=09=09| =09=09=09| =09=09=09H------------ X The dotted lines between point means that those nodes are within wireless= =20 transmission range. Initially S issue a route request for E, and the route replies sent back = are=20 S,A,B,D,E and S,A,B,C,D,E. G overhears them and put them in its route cac= he. G's route cache: -S,A ( from route request S->F) -S,A,B,D,E (from route reply) -S,A,B,C,D,E (from route reply) H's route cache: -S,A,G (from route request S->F) Now H wants to send a packet to E, when G overhears that route request, G= =20 replies to H. How is H is going to get a packet to A in order to use that= =20 source route (S,A,B,C,D,E) ? Sorry for the long post, Jerry. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 15:15:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA13663 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:15:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCNM-0001yF-Jk for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:14:56 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16KEupi007569 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:14:56 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCNM-0001xw-EK for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:14:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA13607 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:14:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCNK-0000rN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:14:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCMR-0000ns-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:14:00 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCLY-0000kl-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:13:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCLU-0000wm-SW; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:13:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCLP-0000vY-Lr for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:12:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA13414 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:12:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCLO-0000jB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:12:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCKc-0000gG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:12:06 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCJk-0000XD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:11:12 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i16KAbLd024306; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:10:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004020615103714825 ; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:10:37 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20040206150940.02b28108@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:10:38 -0500 To: manet@ietf.org From: Joe Macker Subject: Re: [manet] Possible no MANET meeting in Seoul Cc: corson Scott In-Reply-To: <20040205143004.765017f6.ietflists@free.fr> References: <6.0.0.22.2.20040203120350.02910b40@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <20040205143004.765017f6.ietflists@free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 I am asking the ADs if they will hold a short manet meeting. -Joe At 08:30 AM 2/5/2004, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: >Joe, Scott, MANET'ers, > >It's regrettable that neither you nor Scott will be able to make it to >Seoul. However I think it would still be beneficial to have a meeting, if >we could get one or both of the AD's to chair: the WG is currently in a >phase of transition, and I think that it might be usefull to still have a >meeting/discussion regarding future directions. As others have said on the >list, there are a number of topics which might be of relevance.... > >So I would root for still trying to have a meeting -- possibly a short one? > >--thomas > > > >On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:22 -0500 >Joe Macker wrote: > >> MANETers: >> >> Scott Corson and I (WG chairs) cannot attend the Seoul meeting and are >> recommended we skip this round and concentrate on firming up next step >> action items on the mailing list. >> >> If enough participants feel there should be a meeting with specific >> agenda items the ADs could possibly host a short meeting. >> >> -Joe >> > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 15:29:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14476 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:29:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCax-00046H-CP for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:28:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i16KSxB7015762 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:28:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCax-000469-0j for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:28:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14433 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:28:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCav-0001f8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:28:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCZz-0001bL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:27:59 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCZ7-0001Xv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:27:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCZ2-0003mV-Ud; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:27:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApCYy-0003lz-VW for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:26:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14359 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:26:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCYx-0001XE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:26:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCY1-0001UJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:25:57 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApCXZ-0001RV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:25:29 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i16KOxLe024930 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:24:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004020615245915022 for ; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:24:59 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20040206152343.02a96fa8@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:25:00 -0500 To: manet@ietf.org From: Joe Macker Subject: Re: [manet] Possible no MANET meeting in Seoul In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20040206150940.02b28108@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> References: <6.0.0.22.2.20040203120350.02910b40@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <20040205143004.765017f6.ietflists@free.fr> <6.0.0.22.2.20040206150940.02b28108@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 In the charis absence, the ADs have agree to host a short manet meeting in Seoul. I have put in the request with the IETF agenda. -Joe >> >>On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:22 -0500 >>Joe Macker wrote: >> >>> MANETers: >>> >>> Scott Corson and I (WG chairs) cannot attend the Seoul meeting and are >>> recommended we skip this round and concentrate on firming up next step >>> action items on the mailing list. >>> >>> If enough participants feel there should be a meeting with specific >>> agenda items the ADs could possibly host a short meeting. >>> >>> -Joe >>> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>manet mailing list >>manet@ietf.org >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 6 23:45:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA08154 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:45:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApKKb-0001rk-0U for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:44:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i174iaTx007170 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:44:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApKKZ-0001qL-Hg for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:44:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA08116 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:44:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApKKW-0000Xh-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:44:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApKJX-0000T4-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:43:32 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApKIf-0000PK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:42:37 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApKI9-0001Zw-LO; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:42:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApKHL-0001V6-9W for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:41:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA08052 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:41:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApKHI-0000KG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:41:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApKGW-0000HE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:40:25 -0500 Received: from bay12-f116.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.116] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApKFl-0000AH-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 23:39:37 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:39:07 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 04:39:07 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 10:09:07 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2004 04:39:07.0757 (UTC) FILETIME=[52ABA9D0:01C3ED34] Subject: [manet] About Analysis of routing Protocol in MANET Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Dear all, Can anybody tell me what are the parameters i should consider to evaluate performance of various protocols in MANET. i have done simulation of AODV, DSR, DSDV and TORA. Please tell me how to proceed in the evaluation of these protocols so that i could get a conclusion on which protocol is best suited for what environment. the simulations are done on varying loads, Scalability and other issues. thanx in advance. ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Contact brides & grooms FREE! http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmltag Only on www.shaadi.com. Register now! _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 7 02:17:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA25457 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 02:17:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApMiP-0001ID-Qb for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:17:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i177HL10004970 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 02:17:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApMiP-0001I3-Dg for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:17:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA25427 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 02:17:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApMiL-00044t-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:17:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApMhM-00040Z-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:16:17 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApMgO-0003wV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:15:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApMgB-0000PE-Lg; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:15:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApMfR-00009J-IC for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:14:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA25200 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 02:14:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApMfN-0003s9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:14:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApMeR-0003pa-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:13:15 -0500 Received: from rainer.bnt.com ([12.4.218.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApMdv-0003n0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:12:43 -0500 Received: from tom ([198.70.230.133]) by rainer.bnt.com (8.12.8p2/8.12.8) with SMTP id i177BJHq060978; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 02:11:23 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from taolin@vt.edu) Message-ID: <007301c3ed49$f8a58b20$2502a8c0@triplecom.net> From: "Tao Lin" To: "Karun Verma" , References: Subject: Re: [manet] About Analysis of routing Protocol in MANET Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 02:13:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Karun, You may refer to the relay node set (RNS) framework we proposed, which characterizes MANET routing protocols, including reactive, proactive, and hybrid or hierarchy protocols, and locates the factors that affect control overhead in those protocols. The conference paper that summarizes this RNS framework is -- Tao Lin, Scott F. Midkiff and Jahng S. Park, "A Framework for Mobile Ad Hoc Routing Protocols," in the CD proceeding of IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC) 2003, New Orleans, LA, March 2003. Using this framework, one may estimate the trends of performance of MANET routing protocols in terms of control overhead. Therefore, one can design proper simulation models which reflect your application environments and predict the performance of different protocols. Hope this helps. Tao Lin Virginia Tech ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karun Verma" To: Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 11:39 PM Subject: [manet] About Analysis of routing Protocol in MANET > > Dear all, > > > Can anybody tell me what are the parameters i should consider to > evaluate performance of various protocols in MANET. i have done simulation > of AODV, DSR, DSDV and TORA. Please tell me how to proceed in the evaluation > of these protocols so that i could get a conclusion on which protocol is > best suited for what environment. the simulations are done on varying loads, > Scalability and other issues. thanx in advance. > > > ############################################ > > # Karun Verma > # > > ########################################### > > _________________________________________________________________ > Contact brides & grooms FREE! http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmltag > Only on www.shaadi.com. Register now! > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 7 08:00:07 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA02402 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 08:00:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApS3d-0003f4-Lb for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:59:38 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i17CxbxJ014070 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 07:59:37 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApS3d-0003er-Fa for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:59:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA02384 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 07:59:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApS3c-0002hs-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:59:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApS2j-0002cf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:58:42 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApS2F-0002XV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:58:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApS25-0003QU-QI; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:58:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApS1c-0003P6-0N for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:57:32 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA02353 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 07:57:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApS1b-0002Vb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:57:31 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApS0g-0002Rd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:56:35 -0500 Received: from smtp5.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.22.26] helo=mwinf0504.wanadoo.fr) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApRzv-0002Jb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:55:47 -0500 Received: from n0rg.org (AAmiens-107-2-2-229.w81-51.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.51.227.229]) by mwinf0504.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 8D0B21000379; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 13:55:15 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4024E036.2090800@n0rg.org> Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 13:55:18 +0100 From: Laurent Dehoey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Cc: adhoc@n0rg.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] MS Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) and MANET Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, While testing some implementations of MANET routing protocols on MS Windows XP+2000+debian i was wondering if someone has already achieved a succesfull "Microsoft Internet Connection Sharing" among members of an ad hoc network (The ADSL gateway will be an MSWindows XP Pro) Internet Connection Sharing documentation specify that the gateway's leg IP@ to the network be 192.168.0.1 and every other members of the network (MANET Nodes) get an IP@ in the range of 192.168.0.2-254 I suppose i could try to join directly the maintainers of each of the implementation i choosed to test, but maybe they are already reading that post ;-) what i need is an hit to "fill" the different parameters of that four "routing daemon" running on every nodes of the manet and in particular on the gateway. The 802.11b PCMCIA Cards are manufactured by "Connectland" and are relatively cheap 1- OLSR for windows 2000 and Pocket PC http://reptar.grc.upv.es/~calafate/olsr/download/wolsrd_b.exe Admin@TOSH-11K /cygdrive/c/Documents and Settings/Admin/Mes documents/16490/Routage_Ad_Hoc/olsr $ ./wolsrd_b.exe usage: olsrd [ -s ] [ -q ] [ -d ] [ -t ] [ -i 'interface file'] [ -g ] [ 'trace file' ] 2- OLSR11win http://www.grc.upv.es/software/intro_OLSR11win.html Admin@TOSH-11K /cygdrive/c/Documents and Settings/Admin/Mes documents/16490/Routage_Ad_Hoc/olsr/OLSRwin/OLSRwin $ olsr.exe Usage: olsr -d [-i ]* [-g] [-n ]* [-t ] [-h] 3- JAdhoc http://www.aodv.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=UpDownload&file=index&req=viewdownload&cid=2 Admin@TOSH-11K /cygdrive/c/Documents and Settings/Admin/Mes documents/16490/Routage_Ad_Hoc/JadHoc/jadhoc-0.11/jadhoc-0.11 $ java -jar jadhoc.jar sample-windows-xp-jadhoc.cfg <== the config file, accessible with the help of a java GUI J-Adhoc - AODV Protocol Handler Designed & developed at ComNets, ikom, University of Bremen, Germany - 2003 Implements IETF RFC, 3561 4- LUNAR Windows http://sourceforge.net/projects/service11/ - configuring the service (seems to work in XP ?) - address in lunar..ip file TIA for your comments or your questions Laurent Dehoey _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 7 09:12:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA04348 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:12:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApTBI-0000W7-PD for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:11:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i17EBaEN001981 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:11:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApTBI-0000Vs-JT for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:11:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA04345 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:11:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApTBG-0000Ws-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:11:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApTAL-0000So-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:10:38 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApTA4-0000Oq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:10:20 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1ApTA5-0000PT-5K for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:10:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApT9n-00009k-Nc; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:10:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ApT9L-00008t-S8 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:09:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA04324 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:09:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApT9K-0000OJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:09:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ApT8Q-0000Kh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:08:39 -0500 Received: from trinity.critical-systems.no ([194.143.111.171] helo=trinity.gnist.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ApT8E-0000HK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:08:26 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by trinity.gnist.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0B08633096 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:08:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from trinity.gnist.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (trinity.gnist.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 50483-07 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:08:23 +0100 (CET) Received: by trinity.gnist.org (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 1456063307F; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:08:23 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:08:22 +0100 From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?T=F8nnesen?= To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MS Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) and MANET Message-ID: <20040207140822.GC51501@trinity.gnist.org> Mail-Followup-To: manet@ietf.org References: <4024E036.2090800@n0rg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4024E036.2090800@n0rg.org> X-PGP-Public-Key: http://www.olsr.org/~andreto/pubkey.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 28CE 7490 60E0 B540 5F15 1054 C7C8 B66B E0E6 3197 X-PGP-KeyID: E0E63197 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Laurent, = =20 = =20 I am not familiar with the MS "internet connection sharing" protocol - = =20 but it seems to me like it works a lot like network address = =20 translation(NAT). So just out of curiosity - why not use regular NAT = =20 on the gateway? = =20 = =20 A protcol like OLSR can use HNA that allows gateways to inject = =20 information into the MANET about what networks they can reach. = =20 The nodes in the network will then just add the closest gateway as a = =20 "regular IP routing gateway" in the routing table. = =20 It sounds to me like MS ICS needs some more parameters - but if this = =20 is not the case then normal HNA operation ought to be sufficient if = =20 the gateway is correctly configured. So any OLSR implementation that = =20 implements HNA sould work for you. = =20 = =20 Just seems to me like MS ICS imposes more limitations(limits address = =20 space and perhaps locks you to the windows platform?) then NAT which = =20 is a widley used and relativly transparent way of sharing a global = =20 IP address. = =20 = =20 just my thoughts = =20 = =20 regards, Andreas T =20 On Sat, 07 Feb 2004, Laurent Dehoey wrote: > Hello, >=20 > While testing some implementations of MANET routing protocols > on MS Windows XP+2000+debian i was wondering if someone has > already achieved a succesfull "Microsoft Internet Connection Sharing" > among members of an ad hoc network > (The ADSL gateway will be an MSWindows XP Pro) >=20 > Internet Connection Sharing documentation specify that the gateway's le= g=20 > IP@ to the network > be 192.168.0.1 and every other members of the network (MANET Nodes) get= =20 > an IP@ > in the range of 192.168.0.2-254 >=20 > I suppose i could try to join directly the maintainers of each of the > implementation i choosed to test, but maybe they are already > reading that post ;-) > what i need is an hit to "fill" the different parameters of that four > "routing daemon" running on every nodes of the manet and in > particular on the gateway. >=20 > The 802.11b PCMCIA Cards are manufactured by "Connectland" > and are relatively cheap >=20 > 1- OLSR for windows 2000 and Pocket PC > http://reptar.grc.upv.es/~calafate/olsr/download/wolsrd_b.exe=20 > > Admin@TOSH-11K /cygdrive/c/Documents and Settings/Admin/Mes=20 > documents/16490/Routage_Ad_Hoc/olsr > $ ./wolsrd_b.exe > usage: olsrd [ -s ] [ -q ] [ -d ] [ -t ] [ -i 'interface file'] [ -g ] = [=20 > 'trace file' ] >=20 > 2- OLSR11win > http://www.grc.upv.es/software/intro_OLSR11win.html > Admin@TOSH-11K /cygdrive/c/Documents and Settings/Admin/Mes=20 > documents/16490/Routage_Ad_Hoc/olsr/OLSRwin/OLSRwin > $ olsr.exe > Usage: olsr -d [-i ]* [-g] [-n=20 > ]* [-t ] [-h] >=20 > 3- JAdhoc > http://www.aodv.org/modules.php?op=3Dmodload&name=3DUpDownload&file=3Di= ndex&req=3Dviewdownload&cid=3D2=20 > > Admin@TOSH-11K /cygdrive/c/Documents and Settings/Admin/Mes=20 > documents/16490/Routage_Ad_Hoc/JadHoc/jadhoc-0.11/jadhoc-0.11 > $ java -jar jadhoc.jar sample-windows-xp-jadhoc.cfg <=3D=3D the config = file,=20 > accessible with the help of a java GUI >=20 > J-Adhoc - AODV Protocol Handler > Designed & developed at ComNets, ikom, > University of Bremen, Germany - 2003 > Implements IETF RFC, 3561 >=20 > 4- LUNAR Windows > http://sourceforge.net/projects/service11/ > - configuring the service (seems to work in XP ?) > - address in lunar..ip file >=20 > TIA for your comments or your questions >=20 > Laurent Dehoey >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet --=20 Andreas T=F8nnesen(andreas@olsr.org) UniK University Graduation Center University of Oslo http://www.olsr.org _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 7 18:46:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA18574 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:46:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Apc95-0003ih-DO for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:45:55 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i17NjtsI014297 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:45:55 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Apc95-0003iW-9m for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:45:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA18544 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:45:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Apc92-0001fV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:45:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Apc88-0001aO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:44:56 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Apc7O-0001Va-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:44:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Apc7F-0003EE-Q6; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:44:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Apc6N-0003Da-D5 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:43:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA18449 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:43:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Apc6K-0001Qz-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:43:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Apc5O-0001Kz-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:42:07 -0500 Received: from smtp2.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.22.29] helo=mwinf0202.wanadoo.fr) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Apc4Z-0001Be-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:41:16 -0500 Received: from n0rg.org (APastourelles-107-1-1-196.w80-13.abo.wanadoo.fr [80.13.78.196]) by mwinf0202.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 7CE90A40019E for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 00:40:45 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4025777C.8030207@n0rg.org> Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 00:40:44 +0100 From: Laurent Dehoey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MS Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) and MANET References: <4024E036.2090800@n0rg.org> <20040207134232.GB51501@trinity.gnist.org> In-Reply-To: <20040207134232.GB51501@trinity.gnist.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Andreas you wrote : >I am not familiar with the MS "internet connection sharing" protocol - >but it seems to me like it works a lot like network address >translation(NAT). So just out of curiosity - why not use regular NAT >on the gateway? > > yes one can say that concerning the regular nodes inside the MANET, using MSICS or a standard NAT box, it will looks the same. i'm testing an all MS solution (aka MSICS) because my laptop (in particular it's pcmcia slots) is not completly well supported by my day to day debian distrib. :-( >A protcol like OLSR can use HNA that allows gateways to inject >information into the MANET about what networks they can reach. >The nodes in the network will then just add the closest gateway as a >"regular IP routing gateway" in the routing table. >It sounds to me like MS ICS needs some more parameters - but if this >is not the case then normal HNA operation ought to be sufficient if >the gateway is correctly configured. So any OLSR implementation that >implements HNA sould work for you. > > my question was in fact to ask help in correctly configuring the gateway (and the nodes too) using one of those two MSWindows implementations of OLSR . your answer make me wonder if they have HNA implemented in their code...it seems ok for OLSR11Win but i couldn't find easily a reference to HNA in wolsrd_b source code >>1- OLSR for windows 2000 and Pocket PC >>http://reptar.grc.upv.es/~calafate/olsr/download/wolsrd_b.exe >> >>2- OLSR11win >>http://www.grc.upv.es/software/intro_OLSR11win.html >> >> what about JAdhoc and LUNAR + MSICS ? regards, Laurent _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 8 21:34:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12685 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:34:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1F4-0001fe-No for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:33:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i192XkZh006418 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:33:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1F4-0001fR-Ik for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:33:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12640 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:33:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1F1-0003Ip-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:33:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1EC-0003DT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:32:53 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1Da-00038T-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:32:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1DN-0001Fr-H7; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:32:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1D3-0001EW-K2 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:31:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12533 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:31:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1D0-00036i-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:31:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1C9-00032v-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:30:46 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1BO-0002ug-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:29:58 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i192TILf008316; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:29:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004020821291913996 ; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:29:19 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20040208212905.02adc260@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:29:26 -0500 To: Thomas Heide Clausen From: Joe Macker Subject: Re: [manet] Possible no MANET meeting in Seoul Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040207001925.655eafaf.T.Clausen@computer.org> References: <6.0.0.22.2.20040203120350.02910b40@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <20040205143004.765017f6.ietflists@free.fr> <6.0.0.22.2.20040206150940.02b28108@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <6.0.0.22.2.20040206152343.02a96fa8@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <20040207001925.655eafaf.T.Clausen@computer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 06:19 PM 2/6/2004, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: >Thanks, Joe. > >Should proposed agenda items be posted to you guys or to the AD's? Both would be good.... >--thomas > >On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:25:00 -0500 >Joe Macker wrote: > >> In the charis absence, the ADs have agree to host a short manet meeting >> in Seoul. I have put in the request with the IETF agenda. >>=20 >> -Joe >> >> >> >>On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:09:22 -0500 >> >>Joe Macker wrote: >> >> >> >>> MANETers: >> >>>=20 >> >>> Scott Corson and I (WG chairs) cannot attend the Seoul meeting and >> >are>> recommended we skip this round and concentrate on firming up next >> >step>> action items on the mailing list. >> >>>=20 >> >>> If enough participants feel there should be a meeting with specific >> >>> agenda items the ADs could possibly host a short meeting. >> >>>=20 >> >>> -Joe >> >>>=20 >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>manet mailing list >> >>manet@ietf.org >> >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >> > >> > >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >manet mailing list >> >manet@ietf.org >> >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> manet mailing list >> manet@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >>=20 > > >--=20 > >------------------------------------------------ > Thomas Heide Clausen > Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) > M.Sc in Computer Engineering > > E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org > WWW: http://voop.free.fr/ >------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 8 22:04:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13835 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:04:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1i6-0004GI-VN for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:03:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1933kmu016376 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:03:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1i6-0004G3-QK for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:03:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13807 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:03:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1i3-0005v1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:03:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1hB-0005q1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:02:50 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1gZ-0005ku-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:02:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1gR-0003tx-BC; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:02:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq1gH-0003pp-Qz for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:01:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13738 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:01:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1gE-0005jv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:01:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1fK-0005eb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:00:54 -0500 Received: from law11-f95.law11.hotmail.com ([64.4.17.95] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq1eg-0005W7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:00:14 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:59:44 -0800 Received: from 61.187.56.10 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 02:59:43 GMT X-Originating-IP: [61.187.56.10] X-Originating-Email: [zongmng@hotmail.com] X-Sender: zongmng@hotmail.com From: =?gb2312?B?19ogw/c=?= To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:59:43 +0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Feb 2004 02:59:44.0235 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4F5EBB0:01C3EEB8] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id WAA13739 Subject: [manet] clustering algorithm question Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hello everyone Can we take transmission traffic into account in clustering=20 algorithm? By this way,Can we make most of the traffic not out of a cluster ? Is it helpful to routing? Zong Ming _________________________________________________________________ =CF=ED=D3=C3=CA=C0=BD=E7=C9=CF=D7=EE=B4=F3=B5=C4=B5=E7=D7=D3=D3=CA=BC=FE=CF= =B5=CD=B3=A1=AA MSN Hotmail=A1=A3 http://www.hotmail.com =20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 05:24:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10632 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:24:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq8aA-0007P3-S2 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:24:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19AO2ZF028446 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:24:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq8a8-0007Oe-Ok for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:24:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10615 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:23:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq8a5-0002zf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:23:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq8Z9-0002uQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:22:59 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq8YN-0002ps-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:22:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq8YD-0006qy-ER; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:22:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq8XI-0006nG-Pw for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:21:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10513 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:21:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq8XE-0002iX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:21:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq8WO-0002dU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:20:08 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq8Vq-0002Xr-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:19:34 -0500 Received: from mercury.telscom.ch ([193.72.156.161]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Aq8Vs-0001iZ-Ib for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:19:36 -0500 Received: from vaiooo (193.72.156.77) by mercury.telscom.ch with MERCUR-SMTP/POP3/IMAP4-Server (v3.30.07 AS-2621446) for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:09:05 +0100 From: "Marcin Michalak" Organization: Telscom To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 09:08:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <40274E0F.18856.574B0968@localhost> Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.12a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Reply-To: marcin@telscom.ch Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [manet] 1-hop throughput? Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hello, I'm testing the throughput of the network related to the number of hops in ns-2.26 and am getting very low values. For 512 bytes packet I'm getting maximum 680kbps for one hop, while in most publications it's twice as much. I'm using standard ns-2 2Mbps radio and nodes are 200m away from each other. There's no error model, no background traffic. Any suggestions why this value is so low? If you're getting higher values, could you send an example script to me? Quite confused... Marcin ---------------------------------------------------------- Marcin Michalak Research Engineer Mobile: +41 79 330 83 51 Telscom AG _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 05:55:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA11608 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:55:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq945-0000mR-BO for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:54:57 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19AsvHS002994 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:54:57 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq945-0000mD-6U for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:54:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA11574 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:54:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq941-0005iK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:54:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq933-0005cz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:53:54 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq92H-0005Z1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:53:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq92E-0000US-Gp; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:53:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq92A-0000UD-GK for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:52:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA11563 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:52:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq926-0005Ye-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:52:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq91B-0005Ug-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:51:57 -0500 Received: from tik6.ethz.ch ([129.132.119.136]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq90T-0005Qe-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:51:13 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tik6.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CA946AE38 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:51:13 +0100 (MET) Received: from tec-pc-beutel.ethz.ch (tec-pc-jb [129.132.119.38]) by tik6.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AAE6ADB9 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:51:13 +0100 (MET) From: Jan Beutel To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Organization: ETH Zurich Message-Id: <1076323872.4868.1.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:51:13 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] *** announcement: BTnode rev3 Hardware Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello all, The BTnode is a versatile, autonomous wireless communication and computing platform based on a Bluetooth radio, a low-power radio and a microcontroller. It serves as a demonstraton and prototyping platform for research in mobile and ad hoc connected networks (MANETs) and distributed sensor networks (WSNs). We announce the upcoming BTnode rev3 hardware to be available with first samples in Q2/2004 and volume availability through a contract manufacturer thereafter. Pricing will be under USD 100. New features for the BTnode rev3 are a new Zeevo ZV4002 Bluetooth supporting up to 4 independent Piconets and 7 Slaves and an additional Chipcon CC1000 low-power radio. The system is built around an Atmel ATmega128l microcontroller with an integrated battery case for 2x AA and one generic extension connector. The BTnodes can be operated both under the BTnode System Software and TinyOS. For further information please refer to the documentation site at http://www.btnode.ethz.ch where detailed preview information can be found. regards, The BTnode development team -- Jan Beutel j.beutel@ieee.org Computer Engineering and Networks Laboratory, ETZ G75 ETH Zurich +41 1 632 70 32 Phone Gloriastrasse 35 +41 1 632 10 35 Fax CH 8092 Zurich/Switzerland http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/~beutel _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 06:30:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA13006 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 06:30:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq9c7-00063s-MV for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:30:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19BU72f023294 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 06:30:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq9c7-00063d-Io for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:30:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA12941 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 06:30:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq9c3-0001JZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:30:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq9b9-00019f-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:29:07 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq9aC-00012I-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:28:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq9a5-0005Qu-2s; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq9ZE-0005OP-3j for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:27:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA12774 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 06:27:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq9ZA-0000ul-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:27:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq9YC-0000ny-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:26:04 -0500 Received: from [202.179.135.10] (helo=ciit.net.pk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq9XJ-0000hD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:25:12 -0500 Received: from WorldClient [127.0.0.1] by ciit.net.pk [202.179.135.10] with SMTP (MDaemon.PRO.v5.0.1.R) for ; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 16:30:44 +0500 Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 16:30:43 +0500 From: "Usman" To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Securing proactive protocols X-Mailer: WorldClient 5.0.1 X-MDRemoteIP: 127.0.0.1 X-Return-Path: usman@ciit.net.pk X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: manet@ietf.org Message-Id: Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi. i think this paper might be of some help. "Securing the OLSR protocol" Thomas Heide Clausen, Cedric Adjih, Philippe Jacquet, Anis Laouiti, Paul Muhltahler, Daniele Raffo IFIP Med-Hoc-Net 2003, June 25-27, in proceedings. that can be downloaded from here. http://voop.free.fr/Publications/index.shtml or u can download directly from this link.. http://voop.free.fr/Publications/2003/medhocnet03.ps.gz regards. ________________________________________________________________________ M. Usman Saleem R&D Cell : 0300-6653993 COMSATS IT Center, Tel : 0992-383591/5 Ext: 222 CIIT ATD, PK. Fax : 0992-383441 ________________________________________________________________________ -----Original Message----- From: "Wala Turki Latrous" To: Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:59:14 +0100 Subject: [manet] Securing proactive protocols > Hello, > > I have a question concerning the security of the ad hoc routing > protocols : there are several work for the security of the reactive > protocols, but not for the proactive protocols. Are there problems to > secure such protocols? _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 07:13:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14658 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:13:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAHd-00010T-Ur for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:13:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19CD1Zj003868 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:13:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAHd-0000zV-Nm for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:13:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14628 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:12:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAHd-0005Ki-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:13:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAGc-0005En-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:11:59 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAFt-0005AH-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:11:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAFi-0000f3-Vm; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:11:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAEo-0000e2-4C for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:10:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14564 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:10:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAEj-000556-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:10:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqADk-0004zl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:09:00 -0500 Received: from mbox1.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.5.171]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAD4-0004qD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:08:19 -0500 Received: from mail03.student.main.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.5.167]) by mbox1.ntu.edu.sg with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Mon, 9 Feb 2004 20:07:42 +0800 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 20:07:37 +0800 Message-ID: <052033A55521254893A4E2041957E1D0A6A040@mail03.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: How to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in NS-2 Thread-Index: AcPvBU8mvAQb+EkWS+G8weHP0M1/Jw== From: "#LI ZHUOWEI#" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Feb 2004 12:07:42.0278 (UTC) FILETIME=[51CD2660:01C3EF05] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] How to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in NS-2 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I am doing some research to provide security to MANET. However, I am stuck by the way how to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in one MANET scenario, such the nodes that drops the forwarding packets intentively, or absorbs all packets to it, or duplicates the forwarding packets. Is there any solution to this problem. Any suggestion is welcome. Regards! Sincerely yours, Li Zhuowei ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ph.D. candidate Email: zhwei.li@pmail.ntu.edu.sg More: http://www.cais.ntu.edu.sg/~zhuowei $B!!(J _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 07:38:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15611 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:38:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAfw-0003jA-Hm for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:38:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19Cc8Z9014322 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:38:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAfu-0003if-Ip for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:38:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15567 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:38:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAft-0007iC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:38:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAex-0007bT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:37:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAe6-0007Vq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:36:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAdv-0003Bh-DP; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:36:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqAd0-00039M-2o for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:35:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15464 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:35:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAcz-0007Oy-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:35:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAc1-0007JP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:34:06 -0500 Received: from patty.levels.unisa.edu.au ([130.220.36.156]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqAbA-0007EG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:33:12 -0500 Received: from server1 (server1 [172.17.0.2]) by patty.levels.unisa.edu.au (8.12.10/8.12.2) with SMTP id i19CX9RW006183; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 23:03:09 +1030 (CST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 23:03:09 +1030 (CST) From: Peter Pham To: #LI ZHUOWEI# cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] How to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in NS-2 In-Reply-To: <052033A55521254893A4E2041957E1D0A6A040@mail03.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi I think that you can do it without much of pain from modifying codes in the mac and wireless-phy. Another way is to insert a thin layer to do this job. Best Regards. Peter Phuc Pham ========================================== On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, #LI ZHUOWEI# wrote: > Hi, > > I am doing some research to provide security to MANET. However, I am stuck by the way how to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in one MANET scenario, such the nodes that drops the forwarding packets intentively, or absorbs all packets to it, or duplicates the forwarding packets. Is there any solution to this problem. Any suggestion is welcome. > > > Regards! > > Sincerely yours, > Li Zhuowei > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Ph.D. candidate > Email: zhwei.li@pmail.ntu.edu.sg > More: http://www.cais.ntu.edu.sg/~zhuowei > $B!!(J > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 11:20:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25756 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:20:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqE8r-00024q-3t for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:20:13 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19GKCmh007969 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:20:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqE8o-00024B-Um for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:20:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25737 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:20:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqE8o-0004hy-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:20:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqE7t-0004cX-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:19:14 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqE77-0004Xk-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:18:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqE6k-0001bE-H1; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:18:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqE5s-0001Yk-74 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:17:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25578 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:17:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqE5r-0004PS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:17:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqE4u-0004Iv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:16:09 -0500 Received: from gehenna.ece.cornell.edu ([128.84.95.235]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqE4C-0004Cz-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:15:24 -0500 Received: from Panacea_2.cornell.edu (dhcp-128-84-210-143-r3a-desktop.ece.cornell.edu [128.84.210.143]) by gehenna.ece.cornell.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 321A91E8018; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:15:24 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.2.20040209111012.02927220@pop.ece.cornell.edu> X-Sender: papadp@pop.ece.cornell.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:15:18 -0500 To: "Wala Turki Latrous" , From: Panos Papadimitratos Subject: Re: [manet] Securing proactive protocols In-Reply-To: <000c01c3eefb$e95d8c90$fd605fc1@home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi Wala, P. Papadimitratos and Z.J. Haas. "Secure Link State Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks." IEEE Workshop on Security and Assurance in Ad hoc Networks, in conjunction with the 2003 International Symposium on Applications and the Internet, Orlando, FL, January 28, 2003 You can download it here: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu/Publications/saahn03.pdf Panos At 11:59 AM 2/9/2004 +0100, Wala Turki Latrous wrote: >Hello, "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> >I have a question concerning the security of the ad hoc routing protocols >: there are several work for the security of the reactive protocols, but >not for the proactive protocols. Are there problems to secure such protocols? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Panagiotis Papadimitratos http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/pp59 Wireless Networks Laboratory http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu School of Electrical Engineering Cornell University 374 Frank Rhodes Hall Tel: +1-607-255-9068 Ithaca, NY 14853 Fax: +1-607-255-9072 U.S.A E-mail: papadp@ece.cornell.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 11:43:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27546 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:43:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqEV2-0004fP-IJ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:43:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19Gh8qB017933 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:43:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqEV2-0004fA-EN for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:43:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27491 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:43:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqEV1-00000F-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:43:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqEU5-0007hO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:42:10 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqETH-0007co-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:41:19 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AqETI-0005mY-Cm for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:41:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqET2-0004Eu-3r; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:41:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqESX-0004Dm-DO for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:40:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27377 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:40:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqESW-0007Xe-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:40:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqERs-0007QR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:39:53 -0500 Received: from barrichello.cs.ucr.edu ([138.23.169.5]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqEQS-0006zx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:38:24 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by barrichello.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC6B124126; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 08:37:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from io.cs.ucr.edu (io.cs.ucr.edu [138.23.174.180]) by barrichello.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13F9012415C; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 08:37:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by io.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix, from userid 7296) id E89DC269A4; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 08:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by io.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAEA2268D3; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 08:37:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 08:37:51 -0800 (PST) From: Zhenqiang Ye To: Marcin Michalak Cc: Subject: Re: [manet] 1-hop throughput? In-Reply-To: <40274E0F.18856.574B0968@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi Marcin, There is one parameter in mac-802_11.cc: DataRate_. The default value is 1Mbps. I guess you are using the default setup. 680Kbps is reasonable with 1Mbps transmission rate. Thanks, Frank On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Marcin Michalak wrote: > Hello, > I'm testing the throughput of the network related to the number of > hops in ns-2.26 and am getting very low values. For 512 bytes packet > I'm getting maximum 680kbps for one hop, while in most publications > it's twice as much. > I'm using standard ns-2 2Mbps radio and nodes are 200m away from > each other. There's no error model, no background traffic. > Any suggestions why this value is so low? If you're getting higher > values, could you send an example script to me? > Quite confused... > Marcin > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Marcin Michalak Research Engineer > Mobile: +41 79 330 83 51 Telscom AG > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > -- **************************************** Zhenqiang(Frank) Ye Ph.D Student Department of Electrical Engineering University of California, Riverside Phone: (909)-787-2434 email: zye@cs.ucr.edu **************************************** _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 13:18:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01589 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:18:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqFz3-0004JI-KC for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:18:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19IIDGe016562 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:18:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqFz3-0004J3-FM for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:18:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01552 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:18:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqFz1-0000y9-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:18:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqFy6-0000s5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:17:14 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqFx9-0000md-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:16:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqFww-0003vt-Mx; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:16:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqFwL-0003sv-Ni for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:15:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01454 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:15:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqFwJ-0000ho-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:15:23 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqFvE-0000cu-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:14:16 -0500 Received: from bareed3.maktoob.net ([195.172.126.104] helo=maktoobchat.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqFuX-0000YU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:13:33 -0500 Received: from [195.172.126.106] (HELO maktoobchat.net) by maktoobchat.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP id 11631778 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:16:15 +0000 Received: from [195.172.126.113] (HELO maktoob.com) by maktoobchat.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP id 12713969 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:03:15 +0000 From: "yazeed al-sbou" To: manet@ietf.org Comment: Maktoob By BOC X-Mailer: Maktoob 2.0 [Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)] X-Originating-IP: [143.52.2.203] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1256 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:03:15 +0000 Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Calculating usy time in wireless channel Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.7 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all.... Could anyone please tell me how the busy time in a wireless network channel can be calculated to be used for estimation of the channel utilization...??? Any help is appreciated.. YOURS.. Yazeed Ahamd Al-Sbou School of Engineering Sheffield Hallam University Sheiffield Tel. 00441142424419, Mobile 00447813402741 Yazeed.A.Al-Sbou@student.shu.ac.uk United Kingdom _________________________________________________________ You want to REALLY LAUGH? Go to Maktoob Jokes to read, submit, and even rate jokes! http://www.mazadmaktoob.com _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 14:12:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05018 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:12:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqGpW-0000Sq-Kg for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:12:26 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19JCQwY001780 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:12:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqGpW-0000Sd-GL for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:12:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05012 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:12:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqGpU-0007DB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:12:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqGob-00077X-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:11:30 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqGoF-00071D-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:11:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqGoA-00005p-Rg; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:11:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqGng-0008VN-PG for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:10:32 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA04932 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:10:29 -0500 (EST) From: sanjay.ramaswamy@ndsu.nodak.edu Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqGne-00070U-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:10:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqGmu-0006ub-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:09:44 -0500 Received: from smtp1.nodak.edu ([134.129.111.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqGmJ-0006oH-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:09:07 -0500 Received: from ndsu.nodak.edu (webmail1.ndsu.NoDak.edu [134.129.111.141]) by smtp1.nodak.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id i19J97V19826 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:09:07 -0600 Received: from 134.129.125.236 (SquirrelMail authenticated user sanjay.ramaswamy) by webmail.ndsu.nodak.edu with HTTP; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:09:07 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3511.134.129.125.236.1076353747.squirrel@webmail.ndsu.nodak.edu> Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:09:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: [manet] How to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in NS-2 To: In-Reply-To: References: <052033A55521254893A4E2041957E1D0A6A040@mail03.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, As Peter mentions, you have to just change the code in the protocol layer, in which you want to implement. Set some nodes as malisious, and when processing the packets from such nodes, write code to drop them. I have implemented malisious nodes, that drop data packets, in the network layer for AODV, in Glomosim. If you are interested in it, mail me and I can forward the code. Sanjay > Hi > I think that you can do it without much of pain from modifying codes in > the mac and wireless-phy. > > Another way is to insert a thin layer to do this job. > > Best Regards. > > Peter Phuc Pham > ========================================== > > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, #LI ZHUOWEI# wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am doing some research to provide security to MANET. However, I am >> stuck by the way how to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in one >> MANET scenario, such the nodes that drops the forwarding packets >> intentively, or absorbs all packets to it, or duplicates the >> forwarding packets. Is there any solution to this problem. Any >> suggestion is welcome. >> >> >> Regards! >> >> Sincerely yours, >> Li Zhuowei >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Ph.D. candidate >> Email: zhwei.li@pmail.ntu.edu.sg >> More: http://www.cais.ntu.edu.sg/~zhuowei >> $B!!(J >> >> _______________________________________________ >> manet mailing list >> manet@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >> > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 9 17:53:51 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA25906 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:53:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqKHN-0003bb-1b for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:53:25 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i19MrPk2013853 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:53:25 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqKHM-0003bM-RH for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:53:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA25863 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:53:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqKHK-0003MJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:53:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqKGL-0003Ex-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:52:22 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqKFQ-00039j-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:51:24 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqKF5-0003AH-4m; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqKEY-00039K-CJ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:50:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA25735 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:50:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqKEV-00034h-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:50:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqKDb-0002zc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:49:31 -0500 Received: from www4.mail.lycos.com ([209.202.220.170] helo=lycos.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqKD8-0002tc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:49:02 -0500 Received: from Unknown/Local ([?.?.?.?]) by mailcity.com; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:48:25 -0000 To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:48:25 -0800 From: "Sayeem Ahmed" Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sent-Mail: off Reply-To: sayeem@lycos.com X-Mailer: MailCity Service X-Priority: 3 X-Sender-Ip: 207.157.122.252 Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Language: en Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] OPNET help!!!!! Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,PLING_PLING autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I need suggestions regarding any OPNET Modeler book or website apart from OPNET's own help. I need to simulate DSR and TORA using OPNET. Regards, Sayeem ECE, Univ of South Alabama ____________________________________________________________ Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 02:29:07 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03665 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:29:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSJz-000237-JM for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:28:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1A7Sdws007876 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:28:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSJz-00022v-3r for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:28:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03657 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:28:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSJv-0002fz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:28:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSIz-0002br-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:27:37 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSIa-0002Xm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:27:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSIQ-0001Hd-Hp; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:27:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSI4-0001CD-Uf for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:26:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03534 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:26:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSI1-0002XM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:26:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSH4-0002TB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:25:39 -0500 Received: from [203.199.83.37] (helo=rediffmail.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSGv-0002Ok-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:25:29 -0500 Received: (qmail 2761 invoked by uid 510); 10 Feb 2004 07:25:27 -0000 Date: 10 Feb 2004 07:25:27 -0000 Message-ID: <20040210072527.2760.qmail@webmail27.rediffmail.com> Received: from unknown (61.17.113.244) by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 10 feb 2004 07:25:27 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "nirali rohit mody" Reply-To: "nirali rohit mody" To: manet@ietf.org Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Next_1076397927---0-203.199.83.37-2751" Subject: [manet] SAODV Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12, HTML_MESSAGE,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multipart mime message --Next_1076397927---0-203.199.83.37-2751 Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=0AHello  All,
=0A
=0AWe (BE-IT students, Mumbai University) = intend to implement SAODV protocol with minor extensions. We would like to = know if anybody else is also trying to achieve the same.
=0AAlso some po= inters / links which would help us in implementation on NS-2 will be apprec= iated.
=0A
=0AWe are currently trying to modify 'aodv.cc' (implementa= tion file of AODV in NS-2) to accomodate SAODV extentions in it. Is this th= e right way to proceed????
=0A
=0AKindly comment....Thanks in advance= .
=0A
=0ARegards,
=0ANirali Mody and group.
=0A=0A

=0A
=0A=0A --Next_1076397927---0-203.199.83.37-2751 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello All,=0A=0AWe (BE-IT students, Mumbai University) intend to implement= SAODV protocol with minor extensions. We would like to know if anybody els= e is also trying to achieve the same.=0AAlso some pointers / links which wo= uld help us in implementation on NS-2 will be appreciated.=0A=0AWe are curr= ently trying to modify 'aodv.cc' (implementation file of AODV in NS-2) to a= ccomodate SAODV extentions in it. Is this the right way to proceed????=0A= =0AKindly comment....Thanks in advance.=0A=0ARegards,=0ANirali Mody and gro= up.=0A --Next_1076397927---0-203.199.83.37-2751-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 02:51:11 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA04454 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:51:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSfL-0004C1-6Z for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:50:43 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1A7ohuJ016109 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:50:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSfK-0004Bk-VP for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:50:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA04434 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:50:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSfH-0004d6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:50:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSeL-0004Xp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:49:42 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSdp-0004Sn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:49:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSdi-0003pf-1T; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:49:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqSdM-0003oB-Pu for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:48:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA04367 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:48:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqSdJ-0004S7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:48:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqScN-0004Nx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:47:40 -0500 Received: from ind-iport-1-sec.cisco.com ([64.104.129.9] helo=ind-iport-1.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqScF-0004JY-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:47:31 -0500 Received: from india-core-1.cisco.com (64.104.129.221) by ind-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Feb 2004 18:48:52 +0530 Received: from ind-mira-01.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@ind-mira-01.cisco.com [64.104.129.12]) by india-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i1A7knWT022478; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 23:46:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from poornaw2k02 (dhcp-64-104-134-186.cisco.com [64.104.134.186]) by ind-mira-01.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AAU57750; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:18:21 +0530 (IST) From: "Poornananda G R" To: "'Youngmin Kim'" , Subject: RE: [manet] Ad hoc mode in IEEE 802.11b Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:53 +0530 Message-ID: <003b01c3efaa$0d136700$ba866840@apac.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 In-Reply-To: <200402100734.i1A7YCUb018771@venus.uos.ac.kr> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4927.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.11-1999.pdf This will have what u need. 11b is in the form of an addendum which u need to study keeping the above file at ur side. Thanks -Poorna -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Youngmin Kim Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 1:02 PM To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] Ad hoc mode in IEEE 802.11b There are 2 or 3 modes available in IEEE 802.11b wireless LAN. 1. ad hoc mode 2. infrastructure mode 3. AP mode I don't find a part referring to these modes in IEEE 802.11(b) std. What is "ad hoc mode" from the viewpoint of 802.11? _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 11:16:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25752 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqaYV-0003s9-9r for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1AGGBJG014881 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqaYV-0003rw-4c for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25747 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqaYU-0000k2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqaXr-0000dC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:15:32 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqaX2-0000WK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:14:40 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqaWQ-0003ND-Dz; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:14:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqaVU-0003B2-08 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:13:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25607 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:13:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqaVT-0000N6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:13:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqaUZ-0000HD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:12:07 -0500 Received: from zeus.sim.uni-hannover.de ([130.75.24.3] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqaUB-0000BQ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:11:43 -0500 Received: from sim.uni-hannover.de (drozda@sol [130.75.24.73]) by zeus.sim.uni-hannover.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1AGBd7W017695; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:11:39 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <402902BB.DB11FF12@sim.uni-hannover.de> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:11:39 +0100 From: Martin Drozda X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Karun Verma CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] About Analysis of routing Protocol in MANET References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You need to consider all usual parameters, and not only these parameters in isolation but also combinations of these parameters. That means that there can be cases when e.g. latency depends on a single parameter but more usual are cases when an output parameters depends on a combination of input parameters, and this dependency is often very complex. See some of the papers below, how to estimate dependencies between input parameters and performance measures. Christopher L. Barrett, Martin Drozda, Achla Marathe, and Madhav V. Marathe. Analyzing Interaction Between Network Protocols, Topology and Traffic in Wireless Radio Networks. Proc. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC'03), New Orleans, Louisiana, 2003. Christopher L. Barrett, Martin Drozda, Achla Marathe, and Madhav V. Marathe. Characterizing the Interaction Between Routing and MAC Protocols in Ad-Hoc Networks. Proc. The Third ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MOBIHOC 2002), June 2002, Lausanne, Switzerland. Regards, md http://www.sim.uni-hannover.de/~drozda Karun Verma wrote: > > Dear all, > > Can anybody tell me what are the parameters i should consider to > evaluate performance of various protocols in MANET. i have done simulation > of AODV, DSR, DSDV and TORA. Please tell me how to proceed in the evaluation > of these protocols so that i could get a conclusion on which protocol is > best suited for what environment. the simulations are done on varying loads, > Scalability and other issues. thanx in advance. > > ############################################ > > # Karun Verma > # > > ########################################### > > _________________________________________________________________ > Contact brides & grooms FREE! http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmltag > Only on www.shaadi.com. Register now! > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 13:43:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01855 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:43:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqcqe-0007Mw-Bx for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:43:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1AIh4CG028322 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:43:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqcqe-0007Mi-72 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:43:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01842 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:43:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqcqb-0000SX-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:43:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqcpf-0000NU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:42:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqcpC-0000IZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:41:34 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqcoh-0007A3-Bu; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:41:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqcnk-0006yY-TR for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:40:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01754 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:40:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqcni-0000Cw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:40:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqcmn-00007Z-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:39:06 -0500 Received: from gladius.ece.ncsu.edu ([152.1.59.22]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqcm0-00001s-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:38:16 -0500 Received: (from jjun@localhost) by gladius.ece.ncsu.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2) id i1AIcGt11571; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:38:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:38:16 -0500 (EST) From: Jangeun Jun X-X-Sender: jjun@gladius.ece.ncsu.edu To: manet@ietf.org cc: jjun@ncsu.edu, Mihail L Sichitiu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] Re: Calculating usy time in wireless channel Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, The real-time utilization of a wireless channel can be calculated from: A. Given the MAC and Physical parameters with the frame size, determine the minimum transmission time required to transmit the frame. Note that the inverse of this minimum transmission time gives the theoretical maximum throughput (i.e., TMT which indicates the throughput with the maximum channel utilization) B. Have a node capture all the frames on the fly and measure the interarrival time. The ratio of A to B gives an instantaneous (real-time) utilization of the wireless channel being monitored. A paper published in IEEE NCA 2003 (see below) provides an easy-to-use table and formula one can immediately apply. Furthermore, the paper comes with a downloadable software package that monitors the real-time channel utilization based on the table & formula. Hope you find this helpful and convenient. Regards, -Jangeun Jun Jangeun Jun, Pushkin Peddabachagari and Mihail Sichitiu, "Theoretical Maximum Throughput of IEEE 802.11 and its Applications," in Proc. of the 2nd IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications (NCA'03), Cambridge, MA, April 16-18, 2003, pp. 249-256. > Message: 1 > From: "yazeed al-sbou" > To: manet@ietf.org > Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:03:15 +0000 > Subject: [manet] Calculating usy time in wireless channel > > Hi all.... > Could anyone please tell me how the busy time in a wireless network channel can > be calculated to be used for estimation of the channel utilization...??? > > Any help is appreciated.. > YOURS.. > Yazeed Ahamd Al-Sbou > School of Engineering > Sheffield Hallam University > Sheiffield > Tel. 00441142424419, > Mobile 00447813402741 > Yazeed.A.Al-Sbou@student.shu.ac.uk > United Kingdom _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 15:06:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06615 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:06:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqe91-0002df-MB for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:06:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1AK673C010139 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:06:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqe91-0002dS-HT for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:06:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06509 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:06:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqe8y-0001zf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:06:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqe81-0001sn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:05:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqe77-0001lp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:04:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqe6z-00013s-TU; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:04:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqe6K-0000KE-VX for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:03:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06273 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:03:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqe6I-0001fX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:03:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqe5N-0001YU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:02:22 -0500 Received: from smtp-mclean-x.mitre.org ([192.80.55.71] helo=smtp-mclean.mitre.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqe4r-0001RL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:01:49 -0500 Received: from smtp-mclean.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-mclean.mitre.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1AK1nb27926 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:01:49 -0500 Received: from MAILHUB1 (mailhub1.mitre.org [129.83.20.31]) by smtp-mclean.mitre.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1AK1lD27871; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:01:47 -0500 Received: from m29103-pc.mitre.org (128.29.55.33) by mailhub1.mitre.org with SMTP id 6065276; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:01:43 -0500 From: "John A. Stine" To: "'Jangeun Jun'" , Cc: , "'Mihail L Sichitiu'" Subject: RE: [manet] Re: Calculating usy time in wireless channel Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:01:41 -0500 Organization: The MITRE Corporation Message-ID: <000a01c3f010$b3b4cf20$21371d80@MITRE.ORG> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In ad hoc networks the utilization of a wireless channel is not so = linear. An objective of ad hoc networking is to spatially reuse the channel and = so capacity has a volume and range component, i.e. bps across a distance = per volume. Assuming a terrestrial system, volume can be reduced to area and = so the units of capacity can be reduced to bits/(secs * distance). = Measuring this is difficult since it is so dependent on scenario. Ideally, an = access protocol will fix the capacity of a physical volume in a way that is independent of scenario factors such as the density of contenders. Utilization would then be the average spatial use divided by this = capacity. The best known papers on this subject are by Gupta and Kumar but they = try to determine end-to-end capacity of an ad hoc network using the scenario assumption that every node is equally likely to communicate to every = other node. This is different than the spatial capacity of a channel. In the former, capacity is dependent on the size of the network whereas, as mentioned above, channel capacity should be independent of the size of = the network and density of contenders, just dependent on the range of transmission and the rate at which bits are transmitted. One of the shortcomings of most access protocols is that this is not true. Early = work by the likes of Tagachi, Kleinrock, Silvester, and Nelson show that the capacity of Aloha and CSMA type protocols remain sensitive to node = degree. Also, despite the access protocol, capacity will remain a function of = the placement of nodes. So we can then start the argument that optimum = capacity has to be determined for a given placement of nodes before we can make = an assessment of utilization. I really haven't answered the question, but the reason for that is, as I have written, it is not an easy question to answer. John -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jangeun Jun Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 1:38 PM To: manet@ietf.org Cc: jjun@ncsu.edu; Mihail L Sichitiu Subject: [manet] Re: Calculating usy time in wireless channel Hi, The real-time utilization of a wireless channel can be calculated from: A. Given the MAC and Physical parameters with the frame size, determine = the minimum transmission time required to transmit the frame. Note that the inverse of this minimum transmission time gives the theoretical maximum throughput (i.e., TMT which indicates the throughput with the maximum channel utilization) B. Have a node capture all the frames on the fly and measure the interarrival time. The ratio of A to B gives an instantaneous (real-time) utilization of = the wireless channel being monitored. A paper published in IEEE NCA 2003 (see below) provides an easy-to-use = table and formula one can immediately apply. Furthermore, the paper comes with = a downloadable software package that monitors the real-time channel utilization based on the table & formula. Hope you find this helpful and convenient. Regards, -Jangeun Jun Jangeun Jun, Pushkin Peddabachagari and Mihail Sichitiu, "Theoretical Maximum Throughput of IEEE 802.11 and its Applications," in Proc. of the = 2nd IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications = (NCA'03), Cambridge, MA, April 16-18, 2003, pp. 249-256. > Message: 1 > From: "yazeed al-sbou" > To: manet@ietf.org > Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:03:15 +0000 > Subject: [manet] Calculating usy time in wireless channel > > Hi all.... > Could anyone please tell me how the busy time in a wireless network channel can > be calculated to be used for estimation of the channel=20 > utilization...??? > > Any help is appreciated.. > YOURS.. > Yazeed Ahamd Al-Sbou > School of Engineering > Sheffield Hallam University > Sheiffield > Tel. 00441142424419, > Mobile 00447813402741 > Yazeed.A.Al-Sbou@student.shu.ac.uk > United Kingdom _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 17:16:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24480 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:16:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqgAK-0007rk-PJ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:15:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1AMFa7N030232 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:15:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqgAK-0007rX-LA for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:15:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24399 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:15:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqgAI-0006cY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:15:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqg9H-0006RA-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:14:32 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqg83-000699-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:13:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqg7p-0007EZ-HZ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:13:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqg7C-00079f-69 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:12:22 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23964 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:12:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqg79-0005zK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:12:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqg5y-0005rD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:11:07 -0500 Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu ([128.101.36.202] ident=postfix) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqg55-0005lL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:10:11 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by augustus.cs.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E6581134E for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:10:12 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (augustus [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 28925-01-8 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:09:58 -0600 (CST) Received: from exa.cs.umn.edu (exa.cs.umn.edu [128.101.35.175]) by mail.cs.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C60113B1 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:09:52 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (hngo@localhost) by exa.cs.umn.edu (8.9.3/8.9.0) with ESMTP id QAA03626 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:09:52 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: exa.cs.umn.edu: hngo owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:09:52 -0600 (CST) From: Hung Quang Ngo To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cs.umn.edu Subject: [manet] DMS 2004, MM streaming in ad hoc networks CFP Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 CALL FOR PAPERS Special Session on Multimedia Streaming in Ad hoc Networks at the 2004 International Conference on Distributed Multimedia Systems (DMS ?04) Website: http://www.ksi.edu/seke/dms04.html Hotel Sofitel, San Francisco Bay, California September 8 - 10, 2004 Multimedia streaming is one the most popular services on the current Internet. Its already-high demand is even on the rise as the Internet users have started to be familiar with peer-to-peer (P2P) technologies which enable them to share contents between one another directly. Streaming in the P2P manner, in contrast to the traditional client/server approach, takes advantage of existing end-system computational and networking resources, thus allowing economical clients to leverage their collective power to benefit the entire service community. However, multimedia content is resource demanding while user computing devices are not as powerful as are content servers. Consequently, designing a good decentralized streaming scheme in a large-scale peer-to-peer environment is challenging. The problem becomes more of a challenge due to the ad hoc behavior of peers; they can leave and join the system freely at any time. As people tend to work beyond their office desk, it is also expected that the next generation of communication networks includes rapid deployments of independent mobile users. With the emergence of wireless technologies such as IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth, mobile users are enabled to connect to each other directly without any networking infrastructure such as the Internet and infrastructure-based wireless LANs. In other words, the users form a mobile ad hoc network (MANET). As multimedia streaming becomes an integrated part of an increasing number of applications and wireless networks are emerging to dominate the communication environment of the future, it is interesting and worthwhile to investigate multimedia streaming solutions for MANETs. There are many open issues regarding this investigation due to the deviation between the resource, energy, and bandwidth availability of ad hoc networks and the quality of service desired by multimedia streaming users. This special session seeks original contributions of high-quality papers that address novel systems challenges towards the success of multimedia streaming deployment in peer-to-peer and wireless ad hoc networks. Topics of interest include but are not limited to: * Information theories to support ad hoc multimedia streaming * Modeling, measurement, and performance study on ad hoc multimedia streaming * Internet P2P multimedia streaming * P2P multimedia content distribution networks * Ad hoc overlay solutions for multimedia streaming * Live streaming, video on demand, and video conferencing in wireless ad hoc networks * Network and transport protocols for streaming in wireless ad hoc networks * Management, QoS, and security aspects in streaming over wireless ad hoc networks * Streaming applications in sensor networks * Implementations of multimedia streaming in ad hoc networks Please consult the special session co-chairs (see below) for further information about the scope of the special session. Important Dates March 31, 2004 Paper submission due June 1, 2004 Notification of acceptance July 1, 2004 Final manuscript due July 1, 2004 Early conference registration due Special Session Co-Chairs Hung Q. Ngo, University at Buffalo, SUNY (hungngo@cse.buffalo.edu) Thinh Nguyen, Lawrence Livermore National Lab (thinhq@eecs.berkeley.edu) Duc A. Tran, University of Dayton, USA (duc.tran@notes.udayton.edu) Information for Authors Prospective authors are invited to submit their draft papers in PS or PDF format to one of the co-chairs via electronic mail. Submitted papers must be original, unpublished work, and not currently under review for any other conference or journal. The first page of the paper should include the authors' names, affiliations, fax/telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses. The first page should also include a less-than-200-word abstract. The camera-ready version for an accepted paper will be no more than 6 pages in IEEE double-column standard format. Contributions will be reviewed by at least three referees from both the program committee and external reviewers for originality, significance, clarity, soundness, relevance, and technical contents on basis of papers. The accepted papers will be published in the 2004 DMS conference proceedings. Special Issue of Journals Top ranked accepted papers will be fast-tracked to a special issue of an international journal, subject to the review by the program committee. Papers suggested for the special issue will then be reviewed by external reviewers following the standard procedure of review stipulated by the international journal. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 18:35:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA00048 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:35:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqhPM-0003rJ-Sr for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:35:13 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1ANZCsF014827 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:35:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqhPM-0003r3-KP for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:35:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA00010 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:35:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqhPJ-000065-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:35:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqhOL-0007mP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:34:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqhNP-0007gR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:33:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqhNF-0003U9-FF; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqhMR-0003Nu-CN for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:32:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA29910 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:32:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqhMO-0007b4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:32:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqhLQ-0007Vu-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:31:09 -0500 Received: from cclab.cs.cnu.ac.kr ([168.188.129.51] helo=cclab.cnu.ac.kr) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqhKU-0007MB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:30:10 -0500 Received: from newheart (cclab05.cs.cnu.ac.kr [168.188.129.65]) by cclab.cnu.ac.kr (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1ANF8dE005827 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:15:08 +0900 Message-Id: <200402102315.i1ANF8dE005827@cclab.cnu.ac.kr> From: "Ki-Il Kim" To: Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:29:56 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C3F079.3ABB7A60" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcPwLcqV6g6Pi6S/TR+jjDfh4jtKYQ== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: [manet] Multipath routing in MANET Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C3F079.3ABB7A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all... I would like to know if there is an implementation code for any Multipath routing protocols in glomosim, such as (MP-DSR toronto university or split multipath university of california, or ondemand multipath routing university of Alberta, AODV-BR, SMR) any help will be appreciated Sincerely yours. -------------------------------------------------- Ph. D Student Computer Communication Laboratory Dept. of Computer Science Chungnam National University 220 Gung-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejon, 305-764, Korea. Tel : +82-42-821-7451 kikim@cs.cnu.ac.kr kikim@cclab.cnu.ac.kr -------------------------------------------------- ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C3F079.3ABB7A60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all...

 

I would like to know if there is an implementation code for any Multipath routing protocols in glomosim, = such as (MP-DSR toronto university or split = multipath university of california, or ondemand multipath routing university of Alberta, = AODV-BR, SMR) any help will be appreciated

 

Sincerely = yours.

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

Ph. D = Student

 

Computer = Communication Laboratory

Dept. of Computer = Science

Chungnam National University

 

220 Gung-dong, = Yuseong-gu, Daejon,

305-764, = Korea.

Tel : = +82-42-821-7451

kikim@cs.cnu.ac.kr

kikim@cclab.cnu.ac.kr

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C3F079.3ABB7A60-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 19:59:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA07370 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:59:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqiiZ-0001eo-C1 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:59:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1B0x7rc006369 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:59:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqiiZ-0001ee-7J for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:59:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA07255 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:59:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqiiX-0004W7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:59:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqigG-0003wz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:56:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqidj-0003LE-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:54:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqidd-00017S-Kj; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:54:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqicx-00012b-4j for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:53:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06413 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:53:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqicv-0003GQ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:53:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqic1-000394-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:52:22 -0500 Received: from barrichello.cs.ucr.edu ([138.23.169.5]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqibF-0002vJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:51:33 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by barrichello.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 723B71241A7 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:50:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from io.cs.ucr.edu (io.cs.ucr.edu [138.23.174.180]) by barrichello.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CA2C12416A for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:50:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by io.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix, from userid 7296) id 469F32727C; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:50:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by io.cs.ucr.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3512227271 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:50:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:50:54 -0800 (PST) From: Zhenqiang Ye To: In-Reply-To: <200402100734.i1A7YCUb018771@venus.uos.ac.kr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 Subject: [manet] 802.11 analytical model for multi-hop networks. Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, I read some papers on analytical models of 802.11 and found that most fo them are limited to WLAN (1 hop transmission). Is there any analytical model for 802.11 with multi-hop transmission? In such model, at least the hidden/exposed terminal problems should be considered. Thanks a lot, Zhenqiang (Frank) -- **************************************** Zhenqiang(Frank) Ye Ph.D Student Department of Electrical Engineering University of California, Riverside Phone: (909)-787-2434 email: zye@cs.ucr.edu **************************************** _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 20:23:51 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA09120 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:23:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqj62-00048o-0b for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:23:23 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1B1NLsq015918 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:23:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqj61-00048f-Eh for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:23:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA09040 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:23:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqj5z-0000AZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:23:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqj4x-0007mB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:22:15 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqj3y-0007ek-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:21:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqj3n-0003lE-3j; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:21:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqj30-0003i0-3v for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:20:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA08912 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:20:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqj2y-0007Y6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:20:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqj25-0007Sd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:19:17 -0500 Received: from pec.etri.re.kr ([129.254.114.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqj1X-0007Lv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:18:43 -0500 Received: from paulnb (paul3.etri.re.kr [129.254.112.196]) by pec.etri.re.kr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1B1YQfM003917; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:34:26 +0900 (KST) Message-ID: <009a01c3f03c$c2f1db00$c470fe81@etri.re.kr> From: "Jaehoon Paul Jeong" To: "MANET WG" , , Cc: "autonet" References: <20040204073834.94215.qmail@web60607.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:16:45 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Subject: [manet] MANET meeting in Seoul Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=MIME_BASE64_LATIN, MIME_BASE64_TEXT autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgbWFuZXRlcnMsDQoNCkFzIEkga25vdywgbWFueSBwZW9wbGUsIGluY2x1ZGluZyBtZSwgd2ls bCBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZSBpbiB0aGlzIFNlb3VsIG1lZXRpbmcgYW5kDQp3YW50IHRvIGRpc2N1c3Mg bmV4dCB3b3JrIGluIG1hbmV0IHdnLg0KU2V2ZXJhbCBkcmFmdHMgcmVsYXRlZCB0byBtYW5ldCBk ZXBsb3ltZW50IGhhdmUgYWxyZWFkeSBiZWVuIHN1Ym1pdHRlZCB0byBtYW5ldCB3ZywNCnN1Y2gg YXMgTUFORVQgYWRkcmVzcyBhdXRvY29uZiwgTUFORVQgRE5TIGFuZCBJbnRlcm5ldCBjb25uZWN0 aXZpdHksIGV0Yy4NCkluIFNlb3VsIG1lZXRpbmcsIHRoZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMgY2FudCBwcmVz ZW50IHRoZWlyIGRyYWZ0cyBhbmQgZGlzY3VzcyB0aGVtIGZvciBuZXh0IG1hbmV0IHdvcmsuDQpB ZnRlciBvbi1zaXRlIG1lZXRpbmcsIHdlIGNhbiBkbyBmdXJ0aGVyIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYnkgZW1h aWwuDQoNCldoYXQgZG8geW91IHRoaW5rIGFib3V0IG15IHN1Z2dlc3Rpb24/DQoNCkluIGFkZGl0 aW9uLCBJIHN1Ym1pdHRlZCByZWxhdGVkIGRyYWZ0cyBhbmQgd2lsbCBzdWJtaXQgcmV2aXNlZCBv bmVzIHNvb24gYXMgZm9sbG93czsNCiAtIE1BTkVUIEFkZHJlc3MgQXV0b2NvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24N CiAgICAxLiBSZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgZm9yIEFkIEhvYyBJUCBBZGRyZXNzIEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0 aW9uDQogICAgICAgIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuYWRob2MuNmFudHMubmV0L35wYXVsL3B1YmxpY2F0aW9u cy9pZXRmLWludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0L2RyYWZ0LWplb25nLW1hbmV0LWFkZHItYXV0b2NvbmYtcmVx dHMtMDAudHh0DQogICAgMi4gQWQgSG9jIElQIEFkZHJlc3MgQXV0b2NvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24NCiAg ICAgICAgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5hZGhvYy42YW50cy5uZXQvfnBhdWwvcHVibGljYXRpb25zL2lldGYt aW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnQvZHJhZnQtamVvbmctYWRob2MtaXAtYWRkci1hdXRvY29uZi0wMS50eHQN CiAgICAzLiBBZCBIb2MgSVAgQWRkcmVzcyBBdXRvY29uZmlndXJhdGlvbiBmb3IgQU9EVg0KICAg ICAgICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmFkaG9jLjZhbnRzLm5ldC9+cGF1bC9wdWJsaWNhdGlvbnMvaWV0Zi1p bnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdC9kcmFmdC1qZW9uZy1tYW5ldC1hb2R2LWFkZHItYXV0b2NvbmYtMDAudHh0 DQoNCi0gTUFORVQgRE5TDQogICAgMS4gRE5TIFNlcnZpY2UgZm9yIE1vYmlsZSBBZCBIb2MgTmV0 d29ya3MNCiAgICAgICAgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5hZGhvYy42YW50cy5uZXQvfnBhdWwvcHVibGljYXRp b25zL2lldGYtaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnQvZHJhZnQtamVvbmctbWFuZXQtZG5zLXNlcnZpY2UtMDAu dHh0DQoNCkFyZSB0aGVyZSBvdGhlciBkcmFmdHMgc3VibWl0dGVkIGZvciBtYW5ldCBuZXh0IHdv cms/DQpUaGFua3MuDQoNClJlZ2FyZHMsDQpKYWVob29uIFBhdWwgSmVvbmc= _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 20:44:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11238 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:44:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqjPp-00062R-8A for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:43:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1B1hnq1023204 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:43:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqjPp-000628-3g for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:43:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11121 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:43:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjPm-0003iv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:43:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjOP-0003QW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:42:22 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjNP-0003G0-01 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:41:19 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AqjKh-0006XO-90 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:38:31 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqjKF-0005DT-EX; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:38:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqjJT-00050q-VY for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:37:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA10627 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:37:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjJR-0002VS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:37:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjIW-0002QC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:36:17 -0500 Received: from pec.etri.re.kr ([129.254.114.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjHo-0002GM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:35:33 -0500 Received: from paulnb (paul3.etri.re.kr [129.254.112.196]) by pec.etri.re.kr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1B1pHfM004031; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:51:17 +0900 (KST) Message-ID: <00c201c3f03f$1d436db0$c470fe81@etri.re.kr> From: "Jaehoon Paul Jeong" To: "MANET WG" , , Cc: "autonet" Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:33:24 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Subject: [manet] MANET meeting in Seoul (modified) Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=MIME_BASE64_LATIN, MIME_BASE64_TEXT autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgbWFuZXRlcnMsDQoNCkFzIEkga25vdywgbWFueSBwZW9wbGUsIGluY2x1ZGluZyBtZSwgd2ls bCBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZSBpbiB0aGlzIFNlb3VsIG1lZXRpbmcgYW5kDQp3YW50IHRvIGRpc2N1c3Mg bmV4dCB3b3JrIGluIG1hbmV0IHdnLg0KU2V2ZXJhbCBkcmFmdHMgcmVsYXRlZCB0byBtYW5ldCBk ZXBsb3ltZW50IGhhdmUgYWxyZWFkeSBiZWVuIHN1Ym1pdHRlZCB0byBtYW5ldCB3ZywNCnN1Y2gg YXMgTUFORVQgYWRkcmVzcyBhdXRvY29uZiwgTUFORVQgRE5TLCBJbnRlcm5ldCBjb25uZWN0aXZp dHksIGV0Yy4NCkluIFNlb3VsIG1lZXRpbmcsIHRoZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMgKkNBTiogcHJlc2Vu dCB0aGVpciBkcmFmdHMgYW5kIGRpc2N1c3MgdGhlbSBmb3IgbmV4dCBtYW5ldCB3b3JrLg0KQWZ0 ZXIgb24tc2l0ZSBtZWV0aW5nLCB3ZSBjYW4gaGF2ZSBhIGZ1cnRoZXIgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBhYm91 dCBvdXIgbmV4dCB3b3JrIGJ5IGVtYWlsLg0KDQpXaGF0IGRvIHlvdSB0aGluayBhYm91dCBteSBz dWdnZXN0aW9uPw0KDQpJbiBhZGRpdGlvbiwgSSBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgcmVsYXRlZCBkcmFmdHMgYW5k IHdpbGwgc3VibWl0IHJldmlzZWQgb25lcyBzb29uIGFzIGZvbGxvd3M7DQogLSBNQU5FVCBBZGRy ZXNzIEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uDQogICAgMS4gUmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIGZvciBBZCBIb2MgSVAg QWRkcmVzcyBBdXRvY29uZmlndXJhdGlvbg0KICAgICAgICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmFkaG9jLjZhbnRz Lm5ldC9+cGF1bC9wdWJsaWNhdGlvbnMvaWV0Zi1pbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdC9kcmFmdC1qZW9uZy1t YW5ldC1hZGRyLWF1dG9jb25mLXJlcXRzLTAwLnR4dA0KICAgIDIuIEFkIEhvYyBJUCBBZGRyZXNz IEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uDQogICAgICAgIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuYWRob2MuNmFudHMubmV0L35w YXVsL3B1YmxpY2F0aW9ucy9pZXRmLWludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0L2RyYWZ0LWplb25nLWFkaG9jLWlw LWFkZHItYXV0b2NvbmYtMDEudHh0DQogICAgMy4gQWQgSG9jIElQIEFkZHJlc3MgQXV0b2NvbmZp Z3VyYXRpb24gZm9yIEFPRFYNCiAgICAgICAgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5hZGhvYy42YW50cy5uZXQvfnBh dWwvcHVibGljYXRpb25zL2lldGYtaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnQvZHJhZnQtamVvbmctbWFuZXQtYW9k di1hZGRyLWF1dG9jb25mLTAwLnR4dA0KDQotIE1BTkVUIEROUw0KICAgIDEuIEROUyBTZXJ2aWNl IGZvciBNb2JpbGUgQWQgSG9jIE5ldHdvcmtzDQogICAgICAgIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuYWRob2MuNmFu dHMubmV0L35wYXVsL3B1YmxpY2F0aW9ucy9pZXRmLWludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0L2RyYWZ0LWplb25n LW1hbmV0LWRucy1zZXJ2aWNlLTAwLnR4dA0KDQpBcmUgdGhlcmUgYW55IG90aGVyIGRyYWZ0cyBz dWJtaXR0ZWQgZm9yIHRoZSBwdXJwb3NlIG9mIGRpc2N1c3NpbmcgbWFuZXQgbmV4dCB3b3JrPw0K VGhhbmtzLg0KDQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KSmFlaG9vbiBQYXVsIEplb25n _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 21:06:02 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12341 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:06:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqjki-0007HL-A3 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:05:34 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1B25OP5027979 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:05:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqjki-0007HC-3Z for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:05:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12335 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:05:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqjkf-0006Iv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:05:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqjji-0006D3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:04:23 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqjjU-00067E-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:04:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqjjO-0006xi-7A; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:04:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqjig-0006wx-Hn for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:03:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12272 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:03:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqjid-00065v-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:03:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqjhi-00060E-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:02:19 -0500 Received: from mail11.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.5.163]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqjgs-0005mj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:01:26 -0500 Received: from mail01.student.main.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.5.165]) by mail11.ntu.edu.sg with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:00:55 +0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:00:54 +0800 Message-ID: <3D565922795545468AE3E3DA2881BEA9017121AA@mail01.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: [manet] Re: Calculating usy time in wireless channel thread-index: AcPwEVeyBf45aSBeS1OJyckoeXubpgAsrfjQ From: "#LI ZHIFEI#" To: "John A. Stine" , Cc: , "Mihail L Sichitiu" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Feb 2004 02:00:55.0278 (UTC) FILETIME=[E25D50E0:01C3F042] Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Subject: [manet] =?utf-8?B?562U5aSNOiBbbWFuZXRdIFJlOiBDYWxjdWxhdGluZyB1c3kg?= =?utf-8?B?dGltZSBpbiB3aXJlbGVzcyBjaGFubmVs?= Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 TWF5YmUgdGhlcmUgYXJlIHNldmVyYWwga2luZHMgb2YgY2FwYWNpdHkgaXNzdWUgaW4gd2lyZWxl c3MgYWQgaG9jIG5ldHdvcmtzIChvciBpbiBtb3JlIGdlbmVyYWwgbmV0d29ya3MpLg0KDQpPbmUg aXMgZnJvbSBoaWdoZXIgbGF5ZXIgKGUuZy4sIHJvdXRpbmcgbGF5ZXIpLiBBcyBwb2ludGVkIG91 dCBieSBKb2huLCB0aGUgYW5hbHlzaXMgaXMgZXh0cmVtZWx5IGRpZmZpY3VsdCBhcyBpdCBkZXBl bmRzIG9uIHRvbyBtYW55IHBhcmFtZXRlcnMsIGUuZy4sIHRyYWZmaWMgcGF0dGVybiwgcm91dGlu ZyBwcm90b2wsIHBvd2VyIGNvbnRyb2wsIHRvcG9sb2d5LCBNQUMgbGF5ZXIgbWVjaGFuaXNtLCBh bmQgc28gb24uDQoNCkFub3RoZXIgb25lIGlzIGZyb20gTUFDIGxheWVyLiBGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSwg aW4gSUVFRSA4MDIuMTEsIHBlb3BsZSBub3JtYWxseSB0YWxrIGFib3V0IHNhdHVyYXRpb24gdGhy b3VnaHB1dC4gQSBub3JtYWwgbWV0aG9kIGluIGNhbGN1bGF0aW5nIHRoaXMgdGhyb3VnaHB1dCBp cyB0byBmaXJzdCBjYWxjdWxhdGUgdGhlIHByb2JhYmlsaXR5IG9mIGNvbGxpc2lvbiwgbWVkaXVt IGJlaW5nIGlkbGUsIGFuZCBtZWRpdW0gYmVpbmcgYnVzeSBkdWUgdG8gc3VjY2Vzc2Z1bGwgdHJh bnNtaXNzaW9uLCBhbmQgdGhlbiBnZXQgdGhlIHByb3BvcnRhdGlvbiBvZiB0aGUgdGltZSB0aGF0 IHRoZSBtZWRpdW0gaXMgYnVzeSBkdWUgdG8gc3VjY2Vzc2Z1bCB0aW1lIGFtb25nIGFsbCB0aGUg bWVkaXVtIHRpbWUuIE9idmlvdXNseSwgdGhpcyB0aHJvdWdocHV0IHdpbGwgZ3JlYXRseSBkZXBl bmQgb24gdGhlIE1BQyBtZWNoYW5pc20gYXMgd2VsbCBhcyBvbiB0aGUgbnVtYmVyIG9mIGNvbnRl bmRlcnMgaW4gdGhlIGludGVmcmVuY2UgcmFuZ2UuIEFsc28sIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtIHdpbGwgYmVj b21lIG1vcmUgY29tcGxleCBpZiBtdWx0aS1ob3AgbmV0d29ya3MgYXJlIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgZHVl IHRvIHRoZSBjb21tb24gaGlkZGVuLSBhbmQgZXhwb3NlZC10ZXJtaW5hbCBwcm9ibGVtcy4NCg0K TWF5YmUgdGhlcmUgaXMgYW5vdGhlciBkZWZpbml0aW9uIGFib3V0IGNoYW5uZWwgY2FwYWNpdHkg aWYgb25lIGZvY3VzZXMgb24gdGhlIHBoeXNpY2FsIGxheWVyLg0KDQpUaGVyZWZvcmUsIEkgdGhp bmsgSm9uZSBpcyB0YWxraW5nIGFib3V0IHRoZSBjYXBhY2l0eSBpc3N1ZSBmcm9tIHVwcGVyIGxh eWVyIHdoaWxlIEphbmdldW4gSnVuIGlzIHRhbGtpbmcgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGlzc3VlIGZyb20gTUFD IGxheWVyICh0aG91Z2ggaGUgbWF5IG92ZXJzaW1wbGlmeSB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbSkuDQoNCkFnYWlu LCBJIGhhdmVuJ3QgZ2l2ZW4gYSBzcGVjaWZpYyBhbnN3ZXIgdG8gdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uIG9mIHRo ZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBtZXNzYWdlLiBIb3dldmVyLCB3aGF0IEkgYW0gdHJ5aW5nIHRvIHNheSBpcyB0 aGF0OiB3aGVuIHlvdSB0YWxrIGFib3V0IGNhcGFjaXR5IChvciB0aHJvdWdocHV0KSwgbWF5YmUg eW91IGZpcnN0IG5lZWQgdG8gZGVjaWRlIHdoaWNoIGxheWVyIHlvdSB3YW50IHRvIGZvY3VzIG9u LiANCg0KLS0tLS3ljp/lp4vpgq7ku7YtLS0tLQ0K5Y+R5Lu25Lq6OiBtYW5ldC1hZG1pbkBpZXRm Lm9yZyBbbWFpbHRvOm1hbmV0LWFkbWluQGlldGYub3JnXeS7o+ihqCBKb2huIEEuIFN0aW5lDQrl j5HpgIHml7bpl7Q6IDIwMDQ/Mj8xMD8gMTI6MDINCuaUtuS7tuS6ujogJ0phbmdldW4gSnVuJzsg bWFuZXRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCuaKhOmAgTogamp1bkBuY3N1LmVkdTsgJ01paGFpbCBMIFNpY2hpdGl1 Jw0K5Li76aKYOiBSRTogW21hbmV0XSBSZTogQ2FsY3VsYXRpbmcgdXN5IHRpbWUgaW4gd2lyZWxl c3MgY2hhbm5lbA0KDQoNCkluIGFkIGhvYyBuZXR3b3JrcyB0aGUgdXRpbGl6YXRpb24gb2YgYSB3 aXJlbGVzcyBjaGFubmVsIGlzIG5vdCBzbyBsaW5lYXIuDQpBbiBvYmplY3RpdmUgb2YgYWQgaG9j IG5ldHdvcmtpbmcgaXMgdG8gc3BhdGlhbGx5IHJldXNlIHRoZSBjaGFubmVsIGFuZCBzbw0KY2Fw YWNpdHkgaGFzIGEgdm9sdW1lIGFuZCByYW5nZSBjb21wb25lbnQsIGkuZS4gYnBzIGFjcm9zcyBh IGRpc3RhbmNlIHBlcg0Kdm9sdW1lLiBBc3N1bWluZyBhIHRlcnJlc3RyaWFsIHN5c3RlbSwgdm9s dW1lIGNhbiBiZSByZWR1Y2VkIHRvIGFyZWEgYW5kIHNvDQp0aGUgdW5pdHMgb2YgY2FwYWNpdHkg Y2FuIGJlIHJlZHVjZWQgdG8gYml0cy8oc2VjcyAqIGRpc3RhbmNlKS4gIE1lYXN1cmluZw0KdGhp cyBpcyBkaWZmaWN1bHQgc2luY2UgaXQgaXMgc28gZGVwZW5kZW50IG9uIHNjZW5hcmlvLiAgSWRl YWxseSwgYW4gYWNjZXNzDQpwcm90b2NvbCB3aWxsIGZpeCB0aGUgY2FwYWNpdHkgb2YgYSBwaHlz aWNhbCB2b2x1bWUgaW4gYSB3YXkgdGhhdCBpcw0KaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgb2Ygc2NlbmFyaW8gZmFj dG9ycyBzdWNoIGFzIHRoZSBkZW5zaXR5IG9mIGNvbnRlbmRlcnMuDQpVdGlsaXphdGlvbiB3b3Vs ZCB0aGVuIGJlIHRoZSBhdmVyYWdlIHNwYXRpYWwgdXNlIGRpdmlkZWQgYnkgdGhpcyBjYXBhY2l0 eS4NCg0KDQpUaGUgYmVzdCBrbm93biBwYXBlcnMgb24gdGhpcyBzdWJqZWN0IGFyZSBieSBHdXB0 YSBhbmQgS3VtYXIgYnV0IHRoZXkgdHJ5IHRvDQpkZXRlcm1pbmUgZW5kLXRvLWVuZCBjYXBhY2l0 eSBvZiBhbiBhZCBob2MgbmV0d29yayB1c2luZyB0aGUgc2NlbmFyaW8NCmFzc3VtcHRpb24gdGhh dCBldmVyeSBub2RlIGlzIGVxdWFsbHkgbGlrZWx5IHRvIGNvbW11bmljYXRlIHRvIGV2ZXJ5IG90 aGVyDQpub2RlLiAgVGhpcyBpcyBkaWZmZXJlbnQgdGhhbiB0aGUgc3BhdGlhbCBjYXBhY2l0eSBv ZiBhIGNoYW5uZWwuIEluIHRoZQ0KZm9ybWVyLCBjYXBhY2l0eSBpcyBkZXBlbmRlbnQgb24gdGhl IHNpemUgb2YgdGhlIG5ldHdvcmsgd2hlcmVhcywgYXMNCm1lbnRpb25lZCBhYm92ZSwgY2hhbm5l bCBjYXBhY2l0eSBzaG91bGQgYmUgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgb2YgdGhlIHNpemUgb2YgdGhlDQpuZXR3 b3JrIGFuZCBkZW5zaXR5IG9mIGNvbnRlbmRlcnMsIGp1c3QgZGVwZW5kZW50IG9uIHRoZSByYW5n ZSBvZg0KdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGFuZCB0aGUgcmF0ZSBhdCB3aGljaCBiaXRzIGFyZSB0cmFuc21p dHRlZC4gT25lIG9mIHRoZQ0Kc2hvcnRjb21pbmdzIG9mIG1vc3QgYWNjZXNzIHByb3RvY29scyBp cyB0aGF0IHRoaXMgaXMgbm90IHRydWUuICBFYXJseSB3b3JrDQpieSB0aGUgbGlrZXMgb2YgVGFn YWNoaSwgS2xlaW5yb2NrLCBTaWx2ZXN0ZXIsIGFuZCBOZWxzb24gc2hvdyB0aGF0IHRoZQ0KY2Fw YWNpdHkgb2YgQWxvaGEgYW5kIENTTUEgdHlwZSBwcm90b2NvbHMgcmVtYWluIHNlbnNpdGl2ZSB0 byBub2RlIGRlZ3JlZS4NCkFsc28sIGRlc3BpdGUgdGhlIGFjY2VzcyBwcm90b2NvbCwgY2FwYWNp dHkgd2lsbCByZW1haW4gYSBmdW5jdGlvbiBvZiB0aGUNCnBsYWNlbWVudCBvZiBub2Rlcy4gIFNv IHdlIGNhbiB0aGVuIHN0YXJ0IHRoZSBhcmd1bWVudCB0aGF0IG9wdGltdW0gY2FwYWNpdHkNCmhh cyB0byBiZSBkZXRlcm1pbmVkIGZvciBhIGdpdmVuIHBsYWNlbWVudCBvZiBub2RlcyBiZWZvcmUg d2UgY2FuIG1ha2UgYW4NCmFzc2Vzc21lbnQgb2YgdXRpbGl6YXRpb24uDQoNCkkgcmVhbGx5IGhh dmVuJ3QgYW5zd2VyZWQgdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uLCBidXQgdGhlIHJlYXNvbiBmb3IgdGhhdCBpcywg YXMgSQ0KaGF2ZSB3cml0dGVuLCBpdCBpcyBub3QgYW4gZWFzeSBxdWVzdGlvbiB0byBhbnN3ZXIu DQoNCkpvaG4NCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IG1hbmV0LWFkbWlu QGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86bWFuZXQtYWRtaW5AaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZg0KSmFu Z2V1biBKdW4NClNlbnQ6IFR1ZXNkYXksIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDEwLCAyMDA0IDE6MzggUE0NClRvOiBt YW5ldEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KQ2M6IGpqdW5AbmNzdS5lZHU7IE1paGFpbCBMIFNpY2hpdGl1DQpTdWJq ZWN0OiBbbWFuZXRdIFJlOiBDYWxjdWxhdGluZyB1c3kgdGltZSBpbiB3aXJlbGVzcyBjaGFubmVs DQoNCg0KSGksDQpUaGUgcmVhbC10aW1lIHV0aWxpemF0aW9uIG9mIGEgd2lyZWxlc3MgY2hhbm5l bCBjYW4gYmUgY2FsY3VsYXRlZCBmcm9tOg0KDQpBLiBHaXZlbiB0aGUgTUFDIGFuZCBQaHlzaWNh bCBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzIHdpdGggdGhlIGZyYW1lIHNpemUsIGRldGVybWluZSB0aGUNCm1pbmltdW0g dHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIHRpbWUgcmVxdWlyZWQgdG8gdHJhbnNtaXQgdGhlIGZyYW1lLiBOb3RlIHRo YXQgdGhlDQppbnZlcnNlIG9mIHRoaXMgbWluaW11bSB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gdGltZSBnaXZlcyB0 aGUgdGhlb3JldGljYWwgbWF4aW11bQ0KdGhyb3VnaHB1dCAoaS5lLiwgVE1UIHdoaWNoIGluZGlj YXRlcyB0aGUgdGhyb3VnaHB1dCB3aXRoIHRoZSBtYXhpbXVtDQpjaGFubmVsIHV0aWxpemF0aW9u KQ0KDQpCLiBIYXZlIGEgbm9kZSBjYXB0dXJlIGFsbCB0aGUgZnJhbWVzIG9uIHRoZSBmbHkgYW5k IG1lYXN1cmUgdGhlDQppbnRlcmFycml2YWwgdGltZS4NCg0KVGhlIHJhdGlvIG9mIEEgdG8gQiBn aXZlcyBhbiBpbnN0YW50YW5lb3VzIChyZWFsLXRpbWUpIHV0aWxpemF0aW9uIG9mIHRoZQ0Kd2ly ZWxlc3MgY2hhbm5lbCBiZWluZyBtb25pdG9yZWQuDQoNCkEgcGFwZXIgcHVibGlzaGVkIGluIElF RUUgTkNBIDIwMDMgKHNlZSBiZWxvdykgcHJvdmlkZXMgYW4gZWFzeS10by11c2UgdGFibGUNCmFu ZCBmb3JtdWxhIG9uZSBjYW4gaW1tZWRpYXRlbHkgYXBwbHkuIEZ1cnRoZXJtb3JlLCB0aGUgcGFw ZXIgY29tZXMgd2l0aCBhDQpkb3dubG9hZGFibGUgc29mdHdhcmUgcGFja2FnZSB0aGF0IG1vbml0 b3JzIHRoZSByZWFsLXRpbWUgY2hhbm5lbA0KdXRpbGl6YXRpb24gYmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIHRhYmxl ICYgZm9ybXVsYS4NCg0KSG9wZSB5b3UgZmluZCB0aGlzIGhlbHBmdWwgYW5kIGNvbnZlbmllbnQu DQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KDQotSmFuZ2V1biBKdW4NCg0KDQpKYW5nZXVuIEp1biwgUHVzaGtpbiBQZWRk YWJhY2hhZ2FyaSBhbmQgTWloYWlsIFNpY2hpdGl1LCAiVGhlb3JldGljYWwNCk1heGltdW0gVGhy b3VnaHB1dCBvZiBJRUVFIDgwMi4xMSBhbmQgaXRzIEFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucywiIGluIFByb2MuIG9m IHRoZSAybmQNCklFRUUgSW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCBTeW1wb3NpdW0gb24gTmV0d29yayBDb21wdXRp bmcgYW5kIEFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucyAoTkNBJzAzKSwNCkNhbWJyaWRnZSwgTUEsIEFwcmlsIDE2LTE4 LCAyMDAzLCBwcC4gMjQ5LTI1Ni4NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCj4gTWVzc2FnZTogMQ0KPiBGcm9tOiAi eWF6ZWVkIGFsLXNib3UiIDx5YXplZWQtYWwtc2JvdUBtYWt0b29iLmNvbT4NCj4gVG86IG1hbmV0 QGlldGYub3JnDQo+IERhdGU6IE1vbiwgMDkgRmViIDIwMDQgMTg6MDM6MTUgKzAwMDANCj4gU3Vi amVjdDogW21hbmV0XSBDYWxjdWxhdGluZyB1c3kgdGltZSBpbiB3aXJlbGVzcyBjaGFubmVsDQo+ DQo+IEhpIGFsbC4uLi4NCj4gQ291bGQgYW55b25lIHBsZWFzZSB0ZWxsIG1lIGhvdyB0aGUgYnVz eSB0aW1lIGluIGEgd2lyZWxlc3MgbmV0d29yaw0KY2hhbm5lbCBjYW4NCj4gYmUgY2FsY3VsYXRl ZCB0byBiZSB1c2VkIGZvciBlc3RpbWF0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBjaGFubmVsIA0KPiB1dGlsaXphdGlv bi4uLj8/Pw0KPg0KPiBBbnkgaGVscCBpcyBhcHByZWNpYXRlZC4uDQo+IFlPVVJTLi4NCj4gWWF6 ZWVkIEFoYW1kIEFsLVNib3UNCj4gU2Nob29sIG9mIEVuZ2luZWVyaW5nDQo+IFNoZWZmaWVsZCBI YWxsYW0gVW5pdmVyc2l0eQ0KPiBTaGVpZmZpZWxkDQo+IFRlbC4gMDA0NDExNDI0MjQ0MTksDQo+ IE1vYmlsZSAwMDQ0NzgxMzQwMjc0MQ0KPiBZYXplZWQuQS5BbC1TYm91QHN0dWRlbnQuc2h1LmFj LnVrDQo+IFVuaXRlZCBLaW5nZG9tDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQptYW5ldCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCm1hbmV0QGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRw czovL3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9tYW5ldA0KDQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCm1hbmV0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlz dA0KbWFuZXRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3MS5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZv L21hbmV0DQo= _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 21:42:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13656 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:42:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqkKQ-00029S-MC for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:42:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1B2gIjD008264 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:42:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqkKQ-00029D-HK for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:42:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13607 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:42:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqkKN-0002Us-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:42:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqkJR-0002No-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:41:18 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqkIU-0002IP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:40:18 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqkII-0001nj-9c; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:40:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqkHZ-0001jO-Mt for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:39:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13555 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:39:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqkHW-0002Cz-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:39:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqkGa-00027k-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:38:20 -0500 Received: from mail11.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.5.163]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqkG6-00021y-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:37:50 -0500 Received: from mail01.student.main.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.5.165]) by mail11.ntu.edu.sg with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:37:20 +0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:33:49 +0800 Message-ID: <34C4FA35021357469685D8102806A1C01DCE7F@mail01.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: broadcast with 802.11 MAC thread-index: AcPwPXvjMFthc1PRSD+gKNguB3CH0gACf7xL From: "#XIE JIAWEI#" To: "MANET WG" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Feb 2004 02:37:20.0175 (UTC) FILETIME=[F8AA23F0:01C3F047] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] broadcast with 802.11 MAC Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, I am doing some research work concerning reducing the probability of = collision while performing broadcast with IEEE 802.11 MAC. I am also = interested in reliable broadcast with 802.11 MAC. Could anybody guide on = these two issues? Thank you very much! Best regards, Jiawei _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 10 23:28:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16642 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:28:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqlz4-0000B5-9N for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:28:23 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1B4SM46000673 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:28:22 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqlz4-0000Aj-1w for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:28:22 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16639 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:28:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqlz2-0005Hm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:28:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqly6-0005Cs-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:27:23 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqlxw-000583-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:27:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqlxl-0008KQ-Ph; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:27:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqlx5-0008Jj-VT for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:26:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16611 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:26:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqlx4-000577-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:26:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqlw9-00052e-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:25:21 -0500 Received: from bingnet2.cc.binghamton.edu ([128.226.1.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqlvt-0004xy-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:25:05 -0500 Received: from cs.binghamton.edu (cs.binghamton.edu [128.226.123.101]) by bingnet2.cc.binghamton.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1B4OUSM014477; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:24:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (nael@localhost) by cs.binghamton.edu (8.11.7+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1B4O0v16406; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:24:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:23:59 -0500 (EST) From: Nael Abu-Ghazaleh X-Sender: nael@opal To: #XIE JIAWEI# cc: MANET WG Subject: Re: [manet] broadcast with 802.11 MAC In-Reply-To: <34C4FA35021357469685D8102806A1C01DCE7F@mail01.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, I am aware of the following related work to this problem and would be interested in hearing others. Tang and Gerla at UCLA had a couple of papers on modifying 802.11 broadcast to improve reliability. The primary idea in one of them is to require acknowledgements for broadcasts, but to treat collisions when a broadcast happens as an acknowledgement (by detecting noise on the channel). This makes sure at least one node receives the broadcast successfully. A followup paper keeps track of sequence numbers of broadcasts and NACKs missing sequence numbers. Ghandi et al had a mobihoc 2003 paper with a CDS approach to broadcast that also times rebroadcasts to eliminate collisions among packets of the same broadcast (using two hop neighbor knowledge per CDS). However, this does not prevent losses due to other interfering traffic. We have a tech report and a paper under review that characterize the effect of MAC unreliability on network wide broadcast operations. We also investigate selectively rebroadcasting packets to improve reliability. Under high interference, and for sparse networks, network wide broadcast protocols really break down (flooding as well as other protocols that rely on MAC level broadcast). We looked at several heuristics for generating the additional rebroadcast based on factors such as the local interference level and the number of redundant rebroadcasts heard. Of course, this does not guarantee full coverage, but it improves it significantly. I would be happy to send you a copy of our tech report. best regards, -nael --- Dr. Nael Abu-Ghazaleh Assistant Professor -- CS Dept. State University of New York Binghamton, NY 13902--6000 (607) 777 4748 (Phone) (607) 777 4729 (Fax) nael@cs.binghamton.edu On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, #XIE JIAWEI# wrote: > Dear all, > > I am doing some research work concerning reducing the probability of collision while performing broadcast with IEEE 802.11 MAC. I am also interested in reliable broadcast with 802.11 MAC. Could anybody guide on these two issues? > > Thank you very much! > > Best regards, > > Jiawei > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 11 07:34:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA28951 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:34:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqtYr-00061m-1b for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:33:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1BCXn75023166 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:33:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqtYq-00061Z-Tj for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:33:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA28942 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:33:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqtYq-00066P-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:33:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqtXr-00060V-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:32:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqtXV-0005uQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:32:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqtX7-0005p2-SP; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:32:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqtWh-0005mk-VB for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:31:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA28905 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:31:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqtWh-0005tK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:31:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqtVo-0005ob-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:30:41 -0500 Received: from drum.kom.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de ([130.83.139.190] helo=mailserver.KOM.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqtUp-0005fO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:29:40 -0500 Received: from KOM.tu-darmstadt.de by mailserver.KOM.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de (8.7.5/8.7.5) with ESMTP id NAA13051; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 13:29:04 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <402A2072.2050608@kom.tu-darmstadt.de> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 13:30:42 +0100 From: matthias hollick User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] CfP: Euromicro 2004 - Special Session on Wireless Sensor Networks Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit !!! Apologies for any duplicates !!!! ============================================================= Special Session on Wireless Sensor Networks EUROMICRO 2004 Rennes - France, 31 August - 3 September, 2004 http://www.kom.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de/euromicro2004/ ============================================================= Sensor networks comprise a large number of low-cost miniaturized computers each acting autonomously and equipped with short-range wireless communication, limited processing and memory, and a physical sensing capability. Decisions in daily life are based on the accuracy and availability of information. Sensor networks can significantly improve the quality of the information as well as the ways of gathering it. For example sensor networks can help to get higher fidelity information, acquire information in real time, get hard-to-obtain information and reduce the cost of getting information. Therefore it is assumed that sensor networks will be applied in many different areas in the future. Application areas might be production surveillance, traffic management, environmental supervision, medical care or military applications. One of the most important part of a wireless sensor network is the communication between the nodes. The character of the communication used in a wireless sensor network has a huge impact on the usability of a sensor network. For example, the lifetime of a sensor network in which single nodes are battery-powered is essentially influenced by the used communication patterns. Therefore a lot of research in wireless sensor networks is currently focused on the communication aspect. To be able to optimize communication in wireless sensor networks it is important to consider all communication layers. The goal of this special session is to present and discuss current problems in the various communication layers. This special session intends to bring together researchers and practitioners, working on various communication issues in wireless sensor networks. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to: * Hardware: e.g. transceiver concepts, antenna design * Software: e.g. communication stacks in sensor operating systems * Protocols: e.g. MAC and link layer protocols, routing and transport protocols * Operation: e.g. communication related deployment, operation and management issues * Application: e.g. impact of application scenarios on communication patterns Submission of papers for publication with IEEE/CS: * Closing date for submissions: March 1, 2004 * Acceptance notification: May 3, 2004 * Camera-ready version: June 9, 2004 Submission of papers for publication with IEEE/CS: Prospective authors should submit a full paper not exceeding 8 pages or 6000 words in length and including a 150 word abstract. To facilitate an anonymous reviewing process, the first page of the paper should contain only the title and abstract. Authors of accepted papers are expected to register and present the paper at the Workshop. Papers must also be addressed to the session chair: Session Chair: Utz Roedig Mobile & Internet Systems Laboratory (MISL) Department of Computer Science University College Cork College Road, Cork, Ireland Phone: +353-21-490-3976 Fax : +353-21-427-4390 Email: Utz.Roedig@cs.ucc.ie Program Committee: * Matthias Hollick, Darmstadt University of Technology * Cormac J. Sreenan, University College Cork * Ian Marshall, University of Canterbury * Mani Srivastava, University of California _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 11 10:55:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06258 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:55:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqwhX-0002Fb-72 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:54:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1BFsxBR008650 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:54:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqwhX-0002FR-3S for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:54:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06235 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:54:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqwhU-0002ZW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:54:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqwgQ-0002Ra-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:53:51 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqwfo-0002LE-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:53:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aqwfd-0001ud-Vc; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:53:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqwfW-0001tt-Ed for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:52:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06174 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:52:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqwfT-0002KZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:52:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aqweb-0002Ex-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:51:58 -0500 Received: from mailhst2.its.tudelft.nl ([130.161.34.250]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqweE-00028F-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:51:35 -0500 Received: from Octopus.et.tudelft.nl (dutetvh.et.tudelft.nl [130.161.40.138]) by mailhst2.its.tudelft.nl (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1BFpSP24407; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:51:29 +0100 (MET) Received: from OCTOPUS/SpoolDir by Octopus.et.tudelft.nl (Mercury 1.47); 11 Feb 04 16:52:55 +0200 Received: from SpoolDir by OCTOPUS (Mercury 1.47); 11 Feb 04 16:52:30 +0200 Received: from tvs017.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.40.17) by Octopus.et.tudelft.nl (Mercury 1.47) with ESMTP; 11 Feb 04 16:52:25 +0200 Subject: Re: [manet] 802.11 analytical model for multi-hop networks. From: Martin Jacobsson To: Zhenqiang Ye Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1076514659.2303.161.camel@tvs017.et.tudelft.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4-8mdk Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:51:00 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Zhenqiang, On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 01:50, Zhenqiang Ye wrote: > I read some papers on analytical models of 802.11 and found that most > fo them are limited to WLAN (1 hop transmission). Is there any > analytical model for 802.11 with multi-hop transmission? In such model, > at least the hidden/exposed terminal problems should be considered. Here in TU Delft, we have a person doing analytical models for multi-hop networks. His name is Ramin Hekmat and you can find his publications at his website: http://www.nas.its.tudelft.nl/people/ramin/ Maybe this is what you are looking for? Best Regards, Martin Jacobsson. -- Martin Jacobsson _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 12 03:26:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA14069 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:26:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArCAZ-0000Jp-MA for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:26:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1C8PxWt001221 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:25:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArCAZ-0000Jc-DG for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:25:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA14032 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:25:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArCAW-0005zl-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:25:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArC9Y-0005tC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:24:57 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArC8Y-0005jW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:23:54 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArC7i-0008EI-5Z; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:23:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArC6k-00087c-Up for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:22:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA13932 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:22:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArC6i-0005dI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:22:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArC5p-0005Y4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:21:05 -0500 Received: from csiges9.insa-lyon.fr ([134.214.79.200] helo=mail.insa-lyon.fr) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArC51-0005NY-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:20:15 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.insa-lyon.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F21B4B795; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:19:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [134.214.144.152] (ares-chaudet-1.insa-lyon.fr [134.214.144.152]) by mail.insa-lyon.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C3E4B79A; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:19:27 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Message-Id: <35FF734E-5D34-11D8-B921-003065BF92A2@ens-lyon.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: From: Claude Chaudet Subject: Re: [manet] 802.11 analytical model for multi-hop networks. Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:19:43 +0100 To: Zhenqiang Ye X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd 0.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Zhenqiang, we have started to model the equity (or the non-equity) of 802.11 MAC protocol, but finding a general modeling is not straightforward. We have focused on a small scenario pointing at the influence of unbalanced topologies and carrier sense threshold and have modeled ti with discrete time Markov chains. You can find a research report at : http://www.inria.fr/rrrt/rr-4751.html This report may be unclear at some points, if you need enlightenment, feel free to contact me. Hope this helps, Claude. Le 11 f=E9vr. 04, =E0 01:50, Zhenqiang Ye a =E9crit : > Hi, > I read some papers on analytical models of 802.11 and found that = most > fo them are limited to WLAN (1 hop transmission). Is there any > analytical model for 802.11 with multi-hop transmission? In such=20 > model, > at least the hidden/exposed terminal problems should be considered. > > Thanks a lot, > > Zhenqiang (Frank) > > > --=20 > > **************************************** > Zhenqiang(Frank) Ye > Ph.D Student > Department of Electrical Engineering > University of California, Riverside > Phone: (909)-787-2434 > email: zye@cs.ucr.edu > **************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > Claude. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 12 18:36:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24013 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:36:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQMs-0000iZ-GC for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:35:38 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1CNZcji002755 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:35:38 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQMs-0000iM-Ba for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:35:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA23994 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:35:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQMn-0003FB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:35:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQLs-00039K-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:34:37 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQL8-00033t-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:33:50 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQKL-0000Bx-Ie; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQJt-0000At-EZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:32:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA23871 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:32:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQJo-0002wi-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:32:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQIs-0002qt-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:31:30 -0500 Received: from hercules.acsu.buffalo.edu ([128.205.7.123] ident=qmailr) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQI1-0002kS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:30:37 -0500 Received: (qmail 19392 invoked by uid 112170); 12 Feb 2004 23:30:31 -0000 Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:30:31 -0500 (EST) From: Geethapriya Thamilarasu X-Sender: gt7@hercules.acsu.buffalo.edu To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] Doubt in RTS/CTS Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi all, I have a doubt with RTS/CTS transmission at the link layer. Suppose I have a DSR routing protocol that is sending a RREQ packet in the network, does the RTS/CTS transmission occur before the RREQ is sent ? Or is RTS/CTS sent only for data packets. Please clarify! Geethapriya _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 12 18:42:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24766 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:42:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQSt-0002m8-LJ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:41:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1CNfpnC010662 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:41:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQSt-0002lt-D7 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:41:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24754 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:41:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQSo-0004Hb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:41:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQS1-0004AE-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:40:57 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQRJ-00041d-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:40:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQRF-00027V-SK; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:40:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQQi-00025N-5H for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:39:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24503 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:39:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQQd-0003wO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:39:31 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQPg-0003mt-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:38:33 -0500 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca ([142.103.6.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQOi-0003ZL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:37:32 -0500 Received: from granville.cs.ubc.ca (granville.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.7.20]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.12.10/8.11.4) with ESMTP id i1CNbRxI020156; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:37:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:37:27 -0800 (PST) From: Kan Cai To: Geethapriya Thamilarasu cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Doubt in RTS/CTS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 No, RTS/CTS exchange happens when the packet is a unicast pkt. Since RREQ is a broadcast packet, there is no need. Also, there is option in specification that allows you to stop using RTS/CTS for small unicast packet. Hope this helps. --ken On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Geethapriya Thamilarasu wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a doubt with RTS/CTS transmission at the link layer. > Suppose I have a DSR routing protocol that is sending a RREQ packet in the > network, does the RTS/CTS transmission occur before the RREQ is sent ? > Or is RTS/CTS sent only for data packets. > > Please clarify! > > Geethapriya > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 12 19:15:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27675 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:15:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQz6-0005KQ-RM for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:15:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1D0F8Uf020476 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:15:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQz6-0005KB-Nf for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:15:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27598 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:15:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQz3-0001Ac-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:15:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQyA-0000zB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:14:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQxD-0000lt-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:13:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQx7-0004aT-Pc; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:13:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArQwh-0004VP-0s for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:12:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27084 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:12:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQwd-0000eh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:12:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQum-0000Cx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:10:41 -0500 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca ([142.103.6.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArQsg-0007Rz-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:08:30 -0500 Received: from granville.cs.ubc.ca (granville.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.7.20]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.12.10/8.11.4) with ESMTP id i1D08WxI028298; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:08:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:08:31 -0800 (PST) From: Kan Cai To: Geethapriya Thamilarasu cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Doubt in RTS/CTS (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Geethapriya Thamilarasu wrote: > Hi, > Thanx for the reply, > But i always thought RTS/CTS are broadcast packets by themselves. Isn't > that right ? > > you send the RTS to all nodes, that is how unintended nodes defer their > transmission, right?? or am i wrong in my basic understanding of the > concepts? Yes, any node in ad hoc network overhearing RTS/CTS will backoff. But for broadcast message, only basic CSMA/CA is used, that is just random backoff. --ken > > > On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Kan Cai wrote: > > > > > No, RTS/CTS exchange happens when the packet is a unicast pkt. Since RREQ > > is a broadcast packet, there is no need. > > > > Also, there is option in specification that allows you to stop using > > RTS/CTS for small unicast packet. > > > > Hope this helps. > > --ken > > > > On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Geethapriya Thamilarasu wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have a doubt with RTS/CTS transmission at the link layer. > > > Suppose I have a DSR routing protocol that is sending a RREQ packet in the > > > network, does the RTS/CTS transmission occur before the RREQ is sent ? > > > Or is RTS/CTS sent only for data packets. > > > > > > Please clarify! > > > > > > Geethapriya > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > manet mailing list > > > manet@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 12 20:05:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29065 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:05:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArRlJ-0007pk-Cr for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:04:57 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1D14v3d030113 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:04:57 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArRlI-0007pc-4o for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:04:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29025 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:04:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArRlE-0005YR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:04:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArRk8-0005MF-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:03:45 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArRjV-0005Fl-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:03:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArRjR-0007W9-It; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:03:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArRiy-0007Rs-17 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:02:32 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA28914 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:02:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArRiu-0005E0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:02:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArRhv-00059k-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:01:27 -0500 Received: from csmail.cs.siu.edu ([131.230.133.82]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArRgw-000525-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:00:26 -0500 Received: from TA31PC1 (ta31pc1 [131.230.133.78]) by csmail.cs.siu.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id i1D0xW307246 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:59:32 -0600 (CST) From: "Prasenjit Naskar" To: Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:00:20 -0600 Message-ID: <000201c3f1cc$c0835240$4e85e683@cs.siu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01C3F19A.75EA68E0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: [manet] Protocol designing tool Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_60_70,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C3F19A.75EA68E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 I am new to MANET, and I am working on implementing a newly proposed clustering protocol. Does anybody know if there exists a network = protocol designing tool which can facilitate this process and/or help in = benchmarking various protocols against this new one? =20 Thanks, Prasenjit ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C3F19A.75EA68E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

 

I am new to MANET, and I am working on implementing a = newly proposed clustering protocol. Does anybody know if there exists a = network protocol designing tool which can facilitate this process and/or help in = benchmarking various protocols against this new one?

 

Thanks,

Prasenjit

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C3F19A.75EA68E0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 05:16:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01858 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:16:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AraMg-0004WE-1Z for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:16:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DAG65b017369 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:16:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AraMf-0004W1-Hv for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:16:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01846 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:15:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AraMW-0000Iu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:15:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AraLj-0000DI-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:15:07 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AraKl-00007T-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:14:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AraKf-0004HN-VO; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:14:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AraJv-0004FQ-Mu for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:13:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01741 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:13:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AraJm-00000K-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:13:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AraIi-0007iH-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:12:00 -0500 Received: from anyida.tts.lth.se ([130.235.18.10]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AraHw-0007d3-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:11:12 -0500 Received: from telecom.lth.se (lina23.tts.lth.se [130.235.18.83]) by anyida.tts.lth.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA03908; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:10:28 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <402CA2B0.9060404@telecom.lth.se> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:10:56 +0100 From: Ali Hamidian User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vin CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] aodv from ns-2.1b9 to ns-2.26 References: <20040204152201.15943.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040204152201.15943.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Vin, Vin wrote: >Hi all. This is a question i want to address to people >who have used aodv on both ns 2.1b9 and ns 2.26 and i >think there would be many on this forum. > >I have a modified AODV protocol for the 2.1b9 version >which i acquired from someone else. To evaluate it, i >replaced the aodv related files in my ns 2.26 >installation with these modified aodv files which were >written for ns 2.1b9. I had to do a couple of simple >hacks to get it running. > >According to the person who implemented it, this >modified aodv gave better performance for the inputs >he used. But when i run it, i find only degradation of >performance. so my question is are the results itself >invalid or is it because of running 2.1b9 code on ns >2.26? > The 802.11 implementation in ns2.26 (mac-802.11.cc) contains some bugs (there was a discussion about it on the mailing list) so running a wireless simulation in ns-2.26 gives worse results compared to ns-2.1b9 (which has a better 802.11 implementation). I think they have fixed the 802.11 problems of ns-2.26 in the latest release ns-2.27. > Maybe ns 2.26 has done some modifications to >improve performance and at the sametime penalizing old >version code. >I am not much familiar with the evolution of aodv over >these two versions and would appreciate some insight >from someone who does. > >Thanks in advance, >Vin > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! >http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > Regards Ali _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 05:44:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03134 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:44:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aranf-0006aI-46 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:43:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DAhxoQ025308 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:43:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arane-0006a7-Ih for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:43:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03122 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:43:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AranV-0002tk-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:43:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aramc-0002pK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:42:55 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aralp-0002ko-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:42:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arall-0006HI-JR; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:42:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arakp-0006G5-C1 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:41:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03043 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:40:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arakg-0002eq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:40:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arajk-0002b7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:39:57 -0500 Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com ([195.101.245.15]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArajU-0002Wn-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:39:40 -0500 Received: from FTRDMEL2.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.153]) by parsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:39:38 +0100 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C3F21D.ADC0770A" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:39:37 +0100 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Average node disconnection time in manet Thread-Index: AcPyHa1L/iCN89i2TbmihA1UxGRC2Q== From: "MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Feb 2004 10:39:38.0489 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE11EE90:01C3F21D] Subject: [manet] Average node disconnection time in manet Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3F21D.ADC0770A Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,=20 Does anyone can give me some references/papers that mention the average time of node disconnection in manet.=20 best wishes ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3F21D.ADC0770A Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Average node disconnection time in manet

Hello,
Does anyone can give = me some references/papers that mention the average time of node = disconnection in manet.
best = wishes

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3F21D.ADC0770A-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 06:55:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA06107 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:55:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArbuQ-0004e1-SB for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:55:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DBt2xG017853 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:55:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArbuQ-0004dn-As for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:55:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA06083 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:54:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArbuG-000193-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:54:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArbtI-00013p-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:53:52 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArbsR-0000zt-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:52:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArbsU-0004LU-EL; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:53:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arbra-0004KE-B1 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:52:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05986 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:51:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArbrQ-0000ug-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:51:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArbqT-0000q6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:50:58 -0500 Received: from web9601.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.129.180]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arbpf-0000lY-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:50:07 -0500 Message-ID: <20040213115005.71260.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [195.172.45.208] by web9601.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:50:05 GMT Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:50:05 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?chitra=20balakrishnan?= To: manet@ietf.org Cc: gopi@exocore.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1100580643-1076673005=:69926" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-1100580643-1076673005=:69926 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi all, I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters. Thanks, Chitra Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. --0-1100580643-1076673005=:69926 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi all,
        I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters.
 
Thanks,
Chitra
 

Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. --0-1100580643-1076673005=:69926-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 09:55:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11703 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:55:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Areid-0002Vb-RM for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:55:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DEt3VE009643 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:55:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Areid-0002VS-MX for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:55:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11675 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:55:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Areib-000721-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:55:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arehk-0006x5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:54:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aregp-0006s7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:53:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aregf-00022X-OW; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:53:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AregE-00021q-5f for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:52:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11550 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:52:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AregC-0006mV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:52:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArefG-0006fJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:51:34 -0500 Received: from [208.61.208.100] (helo=srv-exchange2.adtran.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AreeN-0006WL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:50:39 -0500 Received: by pobox.adtran.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 08:50:33 -0600 Message-ID: <39B01E2189D99F4B8C9612462DB3922A0CEBACB8@srv-exchange.adtran.com> From: DANIEL BYRNE To: "'chitra balakrishnan'" , manet@ietf.org Cc: gopi@exocore.com Subject: RE: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 08:50:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C3F240.9F8122D8" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE, HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3F240.9F8122D8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" A more useful project would be to develop you own scalable Ad-hoc routing protocol and to design it for scalability rather than relying on the work of others whose goals in developing their protocols did match you own. -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of chitra balakrishnan Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:50 AM To: manet@ietf.org Cc: gopi@exocore.com Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols Hi all, I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters. Thanks, Chitra Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3F240.9F8122D8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"

A more useful project would be to develop you own scalable Ad-hoc routing protocol and to design it for scalability rather than relying on the work of others whose goals in developing their protocols did match you own.
-----Original Message-----
From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of chitra balakrishnan
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:50 AM
To: manet@ietf.org
Cc: gopi@exocore.com
Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols

Hi all,
        I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters.
 
Thanks,
Chitra
 

Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3F240.9F8122D8-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 10:20:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14330 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:20:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arf6w-0002Ul-5w for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:20:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DFK9it009579 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:20:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arf6v-0002UP-GO for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:20:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14279 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:20:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf6t-0001sa-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:20:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf5v-0001nd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:19:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf51-0001ix-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:18:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arf4r-0001Yi-O3; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:18:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arf3u-0001L8-Uw for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:17:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA13987 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:16:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf3s-0001cd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:17:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf2u-0001YP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:16:00 -0500 Received: from aun.it.uu.se ([130.238.12.36] ident=0) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf2G-0001SR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:15:20 -0500 Received: from [130.238.8.241] (dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se [130.238.8.241]) by aun.it.uu.se (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1DFFE1o002943 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:15:14 +0100 (MET) From: Erik =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nordstr=F6m?= To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Message-Id: <1076685309.6625.6.camel@dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:15:09 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by aun.it.uu.se id i1DFFE1o002943 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] AODV-UU v0.8 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I just made version 0.8 of AODV-UU available on the AODV-UU webpage: http://www.docs.uu.se/scanet/aodv/ New in version 0.8: * Bug fixes. * Gateway support with tunnels (real world and ns-2). * Patches for ns-2 v2.26 and v2.27. * ns-2 version now uses a new node class so that last hop links are refreshed. * Better support for runtime settings in ns-2 (link layer feedback). * RFC3561 compliant. Please report problems or bugs. Erik Nordstr=C3=B6m PhD student Uppsala University _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 10:27:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14751 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:27:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfDj-00044w-DP for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:27:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DFRBaI015674 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:27:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfDj-00044j-8b for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:27:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14720 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:27:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfDg-0002Tj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:27:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfCf-0002ND-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:26:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfBl-0002I1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:25:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfBe-0003jI-0L; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:25:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfAl-0003YJ-AK for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:24:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14563 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:24:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfAi-0002CJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:24:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf9l-00027t-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:23:06 -0500 Received: from sam.comnets.uni-bremen.de ([134.102.186.10] helo=bugs.comnets.uni-bremen.de) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arf91-00023z-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:22:19 -0500 Received: from scoobydoo (scoobydoo.comnets.uni-bremen.de [134.102.155.152]) by bugs.comnets.uni-bremen.de (8.11.0/8.11.0/SuSE Linux 8.11.0-0.4) with ESMTP id i1DFMGQ17554; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:22:16 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bugs.comnets.uni-bremen.de: Host scoobydoo.comnets.uni-bremen.de [134.102.155.152] claimed to be scoobydoo From: "Koojana Kuladinithi" To: "'Jack Chan's Hotmail Account'" , Subject: AW: [manet] How to measure Throughput, Transmission Delay and Drop Ratio Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:22:14 +0100 Message-ID: <000e01c3f245$28b4d230$989b6686@scoobydoo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 In-Reply-To: <000501c3e4c1$ebc5dda0$989b6686@scoobydoo> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jack, You can find some scripts that we used to analyse the iperf output for = both UDP and TCP, at=20 http://www.aodv.org/modules.php?op=3Dmodload&name=3DUpDownload&file=3Dind= ex&req=3Dvi ewdownload&cid=3D2 Regards Koojana -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- Von: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Koojana Kuladinithi Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Januar 2004 11:40 An: 'Jack Chan's Hotmail Account'; manet@ietf.org Betreff: AW: [manet] How to measure Throughput, Transmission Delay and = Drop Ratio Hi Jack =A0 =A0There are several ways to measure the above. You can use iperf = traffic=20 =A0generator (http://dast.nlanr.net/Projects/Iperf/) =A0 to get above measurements for both UDP & TCP. And also, you can use = web100 =A0(www.web100.org) to measure window size, RTO and Ssthr for TCP. At = the=20 =A0moment, we are taking some measurements based on iperf & using = web100.=20 =A0We have done some modifications to both iperf and web100 and would=20 =A0like to release all scripts that we used for the test soon. =A0 =A0Regards =A0 =A0Koojana =A0 =A0 -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- Von: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von = Jack Chan's Hotmail Account Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Januar 2004 07:58 An: manet@ietf.org Betreff: [manet] How to measure Throughput, Transmission Delay and Drop Ratio =A0 Hi I need some help. =A0 =A0=A0=A0 I have a wireless testbed composed of 3 laptops equipped with = 802.11b WLAN and running Red Hat Linux 9.0 OS. Later, I will d/l DSR and AODV implementation into this testbed. How can I measure the throughput, transmission delay, drop ratio while during testing? Is there any = program that I can install for gathering all these data? =A0 My 2nd question, is there any good test case (any reference from = website) that I can perform to simulate actual "at work" situation of ad-hoc = network? =A0 Any help would be greatly appreciated. =A0 Jack Chan=20 Queen's University _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 10:37:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA15300 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:37:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfNQ-0004y1-L7 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:37:13 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DFbCUr019087 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:37:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfNQ-0004xm-EM for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:37:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA15267 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:37:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfNN-0003Hp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:37:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfMQ-0003BG-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:36:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfLS-00035V-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:35:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfLL-0004aj-6p; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArfKO-0004XJ-5H for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:34:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA15122 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:34:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfKL-00030R-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:34:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfJS-0002wu-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:33:07 -0500 Received: from web9602.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.129.181]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArfIa-0002sm-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:32:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20040213153210.24578.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [195.172.45.252] by web9602.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:32:10 GMT Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:32:10 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?chitra=20balakrishnan?= Subject: RE: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols To: DANIEL BYRNE , manet@ietf.org Cc: gopi@exocore.com In-Reply-To: <39B01E2189D99F4B8C9612462DB3922A0CEBACB8@srv-exchange.adtran.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-245884624-1076686330=:23926" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_20_30, HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-245884624-1076686330=:23926 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Daniel, It is the time constraint , which has prompted me to simulate the existing routing protocols and comapre them based on issues like sclability and control overhead. I have barely 8 months [ not dedicated] to complete my project.. I would probably consider your suggestion or something in simlar magnitude when i propose my research project. I would be glad if you could suggest some electronic resource which has information regarding the current research in ad hoc routing and scalability. Thanks, Chitra DANIEL BYRNE wrote: A more useful project would be to develop you own scalable Ad-hoc routing protocol and to design it for scalability rather than relying on the work of others whose goals in developing their protocols did match you own. -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of chitra balakrishnan Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:50 AM To: manet@ietf.org Cc: gopi@exocore.com Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols Hi all, I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters. Thanks, Chitra Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. --0-245884624-1076686330=:23926 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Daniel,
         It is the time constraint , which has prompted me to simulate the existing routing protocols and comapre them based on issues like sclability and control overhead. I have barely 8 months [ not dedicated] to complete my project.. I would probably consider your suggestion or something in simlar magnitude when i propose my research project.
 
I would be glad if you could suggest some electronic resource which has information regarding the current research in ad hoc routing and scalability.
 
Thanks,
Chitra

DANIEL BYRNE <daniel.byrne@adtran.com> wrote:
A more useful project would be to develop you own scalable Ad-hoc routing protocol and to design it for scalability rather than relying on the work of others whose goals in developing their protocols did match you own.
-----Original Message-----
From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of chitra balakrishnan
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:50 AM
To: manet@ietf.org
Cc: gopi@exocore.com
Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols

Hi all,
        I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters.
 
Thanks,
Chitra
 

Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now.

Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. --0-245884624-1076686330=:23926-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 12:42:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22378 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhKM-0000pE-5m for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DHgAQO003171 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhKL-0000p4-UR for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22355 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhKK-0007cX-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhJM-0007Xg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:41:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhIR-0007Tz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:40:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhIL-000068-1T; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:40:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhHZ-0008WU-BX for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:39:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22265 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:39:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhHX-0007PN-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:39:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhGj-0007Kg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:38:25 -0500 Received: from ind-iport-1-sec.cisco.com ([64.104.129.9] helo=ind-iport-1.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhGG-0007Ek-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:37:56 -0500 Received: from india-core-1.cisco.com (64.104.129.221) by ind-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2004 04:40:00 +0530 Received: from ind-mira-01.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@ind-mira-01.cisco.com [64.104.129.12]) by india-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i1DHbCWT025298; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:37:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from poornaw2k02 (dhcp-64-104-134-186.cisco.com [64.104.134.186]) by ind-mira-01.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AAW03719; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 23:08:34 +0530 (IST) From: "Poornananda G R" To: "'chitra balakrishnan'" , Cc: Subject: RE: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 23:07:17 +0530 Message-ID: <001901c3f258$06d0fff0$ba866840@apac.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3F286.208AC290" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4927.1200 In-Reply-To: <20040213115005.71260.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Importance: Normal Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_40_50, HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3F286.208AC290 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, i had found the following paper to be useful for gaining a broad brush view of various routing protocols- http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/zhao/stanford-cs428/readings/Networking /Royer_IEEE_Personal_Comm99.pdf other than this, http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/cis788-99/ftp/adhoc_routing/ and http://www.cwc.oulu.fi/~hernia/linkit.html are just two of many you will find on googling. hope this helps! -Poorna -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of chitra balakrishnan Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:20 PM To: manet@ietf.org Cc: gopi@exocore.com Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols Hi all, I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters. Thanks, Chitra Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in the UK now. ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3F286.208AC290 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Hi,
 =20 i had found the following paper to be useful for gaining a broad brush = view of=20 various routing protocols-
 
http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/= zhao/stanford-cs428/readings/Networking/Royer_IEEE_Personal_Comm99.pdf
 
other=20 than this,
 
 http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/cis788-99/ftp/adhoc_routing/&nbs= p;=20 and
 http://www.cwc.oulu.f= i/~hernia/linkit.html
 
are=20 just two of many you will find on googling.
 
hope=20 this helps!
-Poorna
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = chitra=20 balakrishnan
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:20 = PM
To:=20 manet@ietf.org
Cc: gopi@exocore.com
Subject: = [manet]=20 Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing = protocols

Hi all,
        I am about to begin my = project=20 proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad = hoc routng=20 protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues = relating=20 to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources = which=20 will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to = comapare=20 and analyse the above parameters.
 
Thanks,
Chitra
 

Yahoo! India Education Special: Study in = the UK=20 now.

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3F286.208AC290-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 12:43:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22425 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:43:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhLH-0000tG-TY for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:43:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DHh7JQ003416 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:43:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhLH-0000t0-Pq for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:43:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22402 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:43:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhLG-0007ik-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:43:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhKH-0007cA-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:42:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhJJ-0007XA-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:41:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhJJ-0000Kz-CO; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:41:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArhIJ-00005u-T9 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:40:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22311 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:40:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhII-0007SS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:40:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhHL-0007Ng-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:39:03 -0500 Received: from csmail.cs.siu.edu ([131.230.133.82]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArhGO-0007F5-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:38:05 -0500 Received: from TA31PC1 (ta31pc1 [131.230.133.78]) by csmail.cs.siu.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id i1DHb9319344; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:37:09 -0600 (CST) From: "Prasenjit Naskar" To: "'MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN'" , Subject: RE: [manet] Average node disconnection time in manet Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:37:58 -0600 Message-ID: <000b01c3f258$1eb52e20$4e85e683@cs.siu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C3F225.D41ABE20" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 In-Reply-To: Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_60_70, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C3F225.D41ABE20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 At the following link you can find a compendium of several papers = written on MANET. I suppose it will help if you take a look. =20 Prasenjit =20 -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 4:40 AM To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] Average node disconnection time in manet =20 Hello,=20 Does anyone can give me some references/papers that mention the average = time of node disconnection in manet.=20 best wishes=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C3F225.D41ABE20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Average node disconnection time in manet

Hi,

 

At the following link you can find = a compendium of several papers written on MANET. I suppose it will help if = you take a look.

 

Prasenjit

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: = manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN
Sent: Friday, February = 13, 2004 4:40 AM
To: manet@ietf.org
Subject: [manet] Average = node disconnection time in manet

 

Hello,
Does anyone can give me some references/papers that mention the average time = of node disconnection in manet.
best wishes

------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C3F225.D41ABE20-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 13:35:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24519 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:35:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ari9d-0004wq-Ku for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:35:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DIZ9Ll019020 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:35:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ari9d-0004wh-Af for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:35:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24495 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:35:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ari9b-0004Jl-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:35:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ari8f-0004F2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:34:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ari7h-0004Am-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:33:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ari7Z-0004cL-Ob; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ari6i-0004Wk-Ax for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:32:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24451 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:32:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ari6g-00046O-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:32:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ari5s-00042y-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:31:16 -0500 Received: from sangam.sce.carleton.ca ([134.117.4.4]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ari5V-0003yg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:30:53 -0500 Received: from wmc07 (wmc-07.sce.carleton.ca [134.117.61.167]) by sangam.sce.carleton.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id i1DIUjOe003561 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:30:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002b01c3f260$09efd280$a73d7586@sce.carleton.ca> From: "mailhost.sce.carleton.ca" To: References: <000b01c3f258$1eb52e20$4e85e683@cs.siu.edu> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:34:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0028_01C3F236.20C8C450" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: [manet] Average time of topology convergence in a proactive protocol Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C3F236.20C8C450 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Average node disconnection time in manetHello, Can anyone point me to papers or references to find out what is the time = it takes for a proactive protocol like OLSR to figure out that a change = has ocurred in the topology or the link connections of the network? at = least the time scale : msec, seconds, days, years?, assuming whatever = there is to assume (say number of nodes) Thanks Carlos ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C3F236.20C8C450 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Average node disconnection time in manet
Hello,
 
Can anyone point me to papers or = references to find=20 out what is the time it takes for a proactive protocol like OLSR to = figure out=20 that a change has ocurred in the topology or the link connections of the = network? at least the time scale : msec, seconds, days, years?, assuming = whatever there is to assume (say number of nodes)
 
Thanks
 
Carlos
------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C3F236.20C8C450-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 14:01:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA25743 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:01:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AriYv-0007FB-Ko for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:01:17 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DJ1Hqb027842 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:01:17 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AriYv-0007Ez-ED for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:01:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA25692 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:01:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AriYs-0006L7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:01:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AriXo-00069e-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:00:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AriWp-00061q-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:59:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AriWj-0006qu-U6; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:59:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AriVv-0006jd-NO for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:58:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25503 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:58:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AriVt-0005wf-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:58:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AriUw-0005rm-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:57:11 -0500 Received: from web21206.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.175.8]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AriU2-0005nX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:56:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20040213185614.61484.qmail@web21206.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [158.94.254.20] by web21206.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:56:14 PST Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:56:14 -0800 (PST) From: vishak sivakumar To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in redhat linux 9.0 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 hi everybody, i am a postgraduate student doing my thesis work in simulation of MANETs. i have installed redhat linux 9.0 and tried to install ns2 allinone versions of 2.26,2.27,2.1b8a. but in all the versions i get the error message that gcc is not running properly and thers some configure error. i think because gcc is not being liked properly i get tcl/tk script is not being installed properly. anybody please help me if theres anything like shld we set some path for GCC. because i tried with many versions but nothing is working out properly. expecting a quick reply from one of u form the group. regards, vishak srinivasan mdx univ,london __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 14:49:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28737 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjJO-0003au-Ho for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DJnIg9013810 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjJO-0003af-DW for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28697 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjJK-0003Gv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjII-0003B4-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:48:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjHM-00036Z-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:47:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjHC-00038J-8h; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:47:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjGM-00037S-5f for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:46:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28591 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:46:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjGJ-00031Z-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:46:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjFR-0002yA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:45:14 -0500 Received: from akhnaton.ecse.rpi.edu ([128.113.61.96]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjEc-0002pw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:44:22 -0500 Received: from rpi.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by akhnaton.ecse.rpi.edu (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id i1DJWFL19615; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:32:15 -0500 Message-ID: <402D263F.9F2FAFB2@rpi.edu> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:32:15 -0500 From: Nabhendra Bisnik Organization: RPI X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Average node disconnection time in manet References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I guess you might might the following papers useful 1. Longevity of routes in mobile ad hoc networks Turgut, D.; Das, S.K.; Chatterjee, M.; Vehicular Technology Conference, 2001. VTC 2001 Spring. IEEE VTS 53rd , Volume: 4 , 6-9 May 2001 Page(s): 2833 -2837 vol.4 [PDF Full-Text (392 KB)] 2. Mobility: PATHS: analysis of PATH duration statistics and their impact on reactive MANET routing protocols Narayanan Sadagopan, Fan Bai, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, Ahmed Helmy June 2003 Proceedings of the 4th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking & computing 3. Analysis of Ad Hoc Networks: A statistical analysis of the long-run node spatial distribution in mobile ad hoc networks Douglas M. Blough, Giovanni Resta, Paolo Santi September 2002Proceedings of the 5th ACM international workshop on Modeling analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems hth regards, -nabhendra > MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN wrote: > > Hello, > Does anyone can give me some references/papers that mention the > average time of node disconnection in manet. > best wishes -- Nabhendra Bisnik Ph.D. Candidate, Res. ECSE, 2212, 15th Street, RPI, Troy, NY. Troy, NY -12180 http://www.rpi.edu/~bisnin Lab : 518 276 8424 Home : 518 274 2059 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 14:53:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28926 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:53:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjN9-0004TQ-Gv for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:53:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DJrBrN017190 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:53:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjN9-0004TB-Cv for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:53:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28882 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:53:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjN6-0003cV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:53:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjM8-0003Wb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:52:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjLA-0003RW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:51:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjL5-0003ii-Cy; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArjKN-0003ec-9x for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:50:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28773 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:50:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjKK-0003NT-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:50:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjJW-0003Ig-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:49:26 -0500 Received: from rainer.bnt.com ([12.4.218.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArjIZ-0003Cw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:48:27 -0500 Received: from qwertyuiop2003 (h80ad37c6.dhcp.vt.edu [128.173.55.198]) by rainer.bnt.com (8.12.8p2/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1DJmMMX035602; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:48:22 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from taolin@vt.edu) Message-ID: <005401c3f26a$5640d350$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> Reply-To: "Tao Lin" From: "Tao Lin" To: "vishak sivakumar" , References: <20040213185614.61484.qmail@web21206.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in redhat linux 9.0 Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:48:22 -0500 Organization: Virginia Tech MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is a known issue since gcc in Red Hat 9.0 is different from previous versions. There should be posts on ns2 email list regarding the methods to fix the problem. Since you want to use 2.26 and older versions, I would suggest you to install Red Hat 7.3 or 8.0 which should not have these problems. Tao Lin ECE Dept. Virginia Tech ----- Original Message ----- From: "vishak sivakumar" To: Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 1:56 PM Subject: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in redhat linux 9.0 > hi everybody, > i am a postgraduate student doing my thesis work in > simulation of MANETs. i have installed redhat linux > 9.0 and tried to install ns2 allinone versions of > 2.26,2.27,2.1b8a. > > but in all the versions i get the error message that > gcc is not running properly and thers some configure > error. i think because gcc is not being liked properly > i get tcl/tk script is not being installed properly. > > anybody please help me if theres anything like shld we > set some path for GCC. because i tried with many > versions but nothing is working out properly. > > expecting a quick reply from one of u form the group. > > regards, > vishak srinivasan > mdx univ,london > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 16:39:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA07686 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:39:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arl1U-0007H2-2F for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:38:56 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DLcuIS027954 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:38:56 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arl1T-0007Gn-Ui for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:38:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA07589 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:38:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arl1R-0006nQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:38:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arl0K-0006aW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:37:44 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arkyn-0006FL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:36:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arkyg-0006bK-T1; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:36:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArkyT-0006aB-7B for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:35:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA06922 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:35:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArkyR-0006AI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:35:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arkw8-0005eC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:33:25 -0500 Received: from gehenna.ece.cornell.edu ([128.84.95.235]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arktu-00058F-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:31:06 -0500 Received: from photon.ece.cornell.edu (photon.ece.cornell.edu [128.84.81.138]) by gehenna.ece.cornell.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 137841E802E; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:31:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:31:02 -0500 (EST) From: Prince Samar To: MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Average node disconnection time in manet In-Reply-To: <402D263F.9F2FAFB2@rpi.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, You might also find the following paper to be relevance: Prince Samar, Stephen B. Wicker, "Characterizing the Communication Links of a Node in a Mobile Ad Hoc Network," in ICC 2004, Paris, June 2004. Regards, Prince On Fri, 13 Feb 2004, Nabhendra Bisnik wrote: : I guess you might might the following papers useful : : 1. Longevity of routes in mobile ad hoc networks : Turgut, D.; Das, S.K.; Chatterjee, M.; : Vehicular Technology Conference, 2001. VTC 2001 Spring. IEEE VTS 53rd , : Volume: 4 , 6-9 May 2001 : Page(s): 2833 -2837 vol.4 [PDF Full-Text (392 KB)] : : 2. Mobility: PATHS: analysis of PATH duration statistics and their : impact on reactive MANET routing protocols : Narayanan Sadagopan, Fan Bai, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, Ahmed Helmy : June 2003 Proceedings of the 4th ACM international symposium : on Mobile ad hoc networking & computing : : 3. Analysis of Ad Hoc Networks: A statistical analysis of the long-run : node spatial distribution in mobile ad hoc networks : Douglas M. Blough, Giovanni Resta, Paolo Santi : September 2002Proceedings of the 5th ACM international workshop on : Modeling analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems : : hth : : regards, : -nabhendra : : > MEDDOUR Djamal Eddine thesard FTRD/DAC/LAN wrote: : > : > Hello, : > Does anyone can give me some references/papers that mention the : > average time of node disconnection in manet. : > best wishes : : _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 13 16:50:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08841 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:50:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArlCP-0007yu-S2 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:50:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1DLoDFD030677 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:50:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArlCP-0007yi-Mg for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:50:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08777 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:50:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArlCN-0000at-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:50:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1ArlBP-0000U0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:49:12 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ArlAQ-0000ON-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:48:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ArlAH-0007f1-MQ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:48:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Arl9Y-0007eI-66 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:47:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08668 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:47:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arl9W-0000KR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:47:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Arl8d-0000G5-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:46:20 -0500 Received: from students.depaul.edu ([140.192.1.100]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Arl7k-00008s-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:45:24 -0500 Received: from salah (unknown [140.192.35.25]) by students.depaul.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D62B153E; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:45:23 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <000401c3f27a$af319520$1923c08c@cstcis.cti.depaul.edu> From: "Salah Aly" To: "chitra balakrishnan" , Cc: References: <20040213115005.71260.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 08:03:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0046_01C3F207.E27B7360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: [manet] GSM security paper needed Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_06_12, HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C3F207.E27B7360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi all; would anyone help me to find a survey paper in GSM Mobile security? thanks; --Salah ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C3F207.E27B7360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
hi all;
would anyone help me to find a survey = paper in GSM=20 Mobile security?
 
thanks;
--Salah
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C3F207.E27B7360-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 14 16:35:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01722 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:35:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As7RG-0004PK-Sv for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:35:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1ELZ2ZN016938 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:35:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As7RG-0004Oy-4J for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:35:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01684 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:34:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As7RE-0003sT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:35:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1As7QG-0003ok-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:34:00 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As7PZ-0003ln-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:33:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As7PJ-00044n-6i; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As7PG-00044Y-8d for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:32:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01657 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:32:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As7PE-0003l0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:32:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1As7OK-0003iZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:32:01 -0500 Received: from law11-f85.law11.hotmail.com ([64.4.17.85] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As7Nf-0003ca-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:31:19 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 13:30:48 -0800 Received: from 129.173.143.121 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:30:48 GMT X-Originating-IP: [129.173.143.121] X-Originating-Email: [aslam_nauman@hotmail.com] X-Sender: aslam_nauman@hotmail.com From: "Nauman Aslam" To: vishak_001@yahoo.com, manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in redhat linux 9.0 Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:30:48 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Feb 2004 21:30:48.0986 (UTC) FILETIME=[D05067A0:01C3F341] Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, I think your problem is that you have not installed Tcl & TK binaries when installing the RedHat 9.0. Try to add those packages ( I think they are under X-development section). I think this should work for you. Thanks, NAUMAN -------------------- >From: vishak sivakumar >To: manet@ietf.org >Subject: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in redhat >linux 9.0 >Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:56:14 -0800 (PST) > >hi everybody, >i am a postgraduate student doing my thesis work in >simulation of MANETs. i have installed redhat linux >9.0 and tried to install ns2 allinone versions of >2.26,2.27,2.1b8a. > >but in all the versions i get the error message that >gcc is not running properly and thers some configure >error. i think because gcc is not being liked properly >i get tcl/tk script is not being installed properly. > >anybody please help me if theres anything like shld we >set some path for GCC. because i tried with many >versions but nothing is working out properly. > >expecting a quick reply from one of u form the group. > >regards, >vishak srinivasan >mdx univ,london > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. >http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/features&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 14 17:56:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03912 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:56:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As8hc-0000zN-Ir for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:56:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1EMu05O003800 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:56:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As8hc-0000zD-EQ for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:56:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03882 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:55:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As8hZ-0001Ro-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:55:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1As8gf-0001O0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:55:02 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As8fy-0001Kf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:54:18 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As8fh-0000dz-8O; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:54:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1As8es-0000Zm-K9 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:53:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03822 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:53:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As8eq-0001GN-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:53:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1As8ds-0001CT-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:52:09 -0500 Received: from law11-f42.law11.hotmail.com ([64.4.17.42] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1As8d7-00014e-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:51:21 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:50:51 -0800 Received: from 129.173.61.70 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:50:51 GMT X-Originating-IP: [129.173.61.70] X-Originating-Email: [aslam_nauman@hotmail.com] X-Sender: aslam_nauman@hotmail.com From: "Nauman Aslam" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 18:50:51 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Feb 2004 22:50:51.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=[FEDCE7A0:01C3F34C] Subject: [manet] Tracegraph help needed Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,CLICK_BELOW,HTML_30_40, HTML_LINK_CLICK_HERE,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_NO_CHARSET,MIME_HTML_ONLY autolearn=no version=2.60

Hi,

I am trying to use tracegraph to analyze my tracefile. I am getting the following error message.

Maximal number of lines (1000) has been processed!
wireless format detected
ERROR: Cannot read the file!
Index exceeds matrix dimensions.


Can please anyone help me regardign this,

Thanks,

NAUMAN
----------------------------

>From: "Nauman Aslam"
>To: vishak_001@yahoo.com, manet@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in redhat linux 9.0
>Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:30:48 -0400
>
>
>Hi,
>I think your problem is that you  have not installed Tcl & TK  
>binaries when  installing the RedHat 9.0.  Try  to add those  
>packages ( I think they are under X-development section).  I think
>this should work for you.
>
>Thanks,
>
>NAUMAN
>--------------------
>
>>From: vishak sivakumar
>>To: manet@ietf.org
>>Subject: [manet] anybody please help me with installing NS-2 in
>>redhat linux 9.0
>>Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:56:14 -0800 (PST)
>>
>>hi everybody,
>>i am a postgraduate student doing my thesis work in
>>simulation of MANETs. i have installed redhat linux
>>9.0 and tried to install ns2 allinone versions of
>>2.26,2.27,2.1b8a.
>>
>>but in all the versions i get the error message that
>>gcc is not running properly and thers some configure
>>error. i think because gcc is not being liked properly
>>i get tcl/tk script is not being installed properly.
>>
>>anybody please help me if theres anything like shld we
>>set some path for GCC. because i tried with many
>>versions but nothing is working out properly.
>>
>>expecting a quick reply from one of u form the group.
>>
>>regards,
>>vishak srinivasan
>>mdx univ,london
>>
>>__________________________________
>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
>>http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>manet mailing list
>>manet@ietf.org
>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
>http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/features&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>manet mailing list
>manet@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 14 21:54:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA10102 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:54:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsCQ5-0002Vk-G1 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:54:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1F2s9fl009646 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:54:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsCQ5-0002VV-96 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:54:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA10055 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:54:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsCQ2-0006In-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:54:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsCP9-0006EN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:53:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsCOE-0006B5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:52:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsCO2-00027q-8Y; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:52:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsCNC-000268-Gi for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:51:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA09998 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:51:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsCN9-00066Y-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:51:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsCMD-000641-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:50:09 -0500 Received: from web21401.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.232.71]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsCLW-00061Q-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:49:26 -0500 Message-ID: <20040215024926.24951.qmail@web21401.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.4.35.105] by web21401.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 18:49:26 PST Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 18:49:26 -0800 (PST) From: Leon Martin To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] Help on ns-2 implementation of S-TCP and I-TCP Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, there, Does anyone know if Snooping TCP (S-TCP) and Indirect TCP (I-TCP) are implemented in ns-2? If not, any suggestions about how to do the simulation? Thanks! -Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 14 23:30:44 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12194 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:30:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsDv5-0007cT-G8 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:30:16 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1F4UFvR029283 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:30:15 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsDv5-0007cE-CI for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:30:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12127 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:30:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsDv3-0004Ab-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:30:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsDtC-0003nd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:28:19 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsDsa-0003jy-02 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:27:40 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AsDqD-0000M4-IB for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:25:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsDq4-00075D-9r; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:25:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsDpF-00073u-NM for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:24:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12003 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:24:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsDpD-0003Yr-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:24:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsDoN-0003WS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:23:19 -0500 Received: from patty.levels.unisa.edu.au ([130.220.36.156]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsDnv-0003TS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 23:22:52 -0500 Received: from server1 (server1 [172.17.0.2]) by patty.levels.unisa.edu.au (8.12.10/8.12.2) with SMTP id i1F4MiRW003812; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:52:44 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:52:44 +1030 (CST) From: Peter Pham To: Leon Martin cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Help on ns-2 implementation of S-TCP and I-TCP In-Reply-To: <20040215024926.24951.qmail@web21401.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi all Recently, I noticed a lot of email questions about ns2 which is posted on the MANET mailing list. Please note that this mailing list is solely for discussion in ad hoc networks issues. Please forward the question about ns2 to the ns2 mailing list. This is better for us and better for you as well because you will have more chance of receiving a reply. Best Regards. Peter Phuc Pham On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, Leon Martin wrote: > Hi, there, > > Does anyone know if Snooping TCP (S-TCP) and Indirect > TCP (I-TCP) are implemented in ns-2? If not, any > suggestions about how to do the simulation? > > Thanks! > > -Leon > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 15 01:35:43 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA14945 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:35:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsFs2-0007Cy-W9 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:35:15 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1F6ZEvY027702 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:35:14 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsFs2-0007Cj-RS for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:35:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA14893 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:35:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsFrz-0003nS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:35:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsFr1-0003io-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:34:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsFq3-0003fN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:33:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsFpt-0006vU-F8; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsFpC-0006ra-2O for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:32:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA14835 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:32:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsFp8-0003cn-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:32:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsFoE-0003aD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:31:18 -0500 Received: from bay14-f16.bay14.hotmail.com ([64.4.49.16] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsFnk-0003XK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:30:48 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:30:18 -0800 Received: from 210.42.48.14 by by14fd.bay14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 06:30:18 GMT X-Originating-IP: [210.42.48.14] X-Originating-Email: [changchun_xu@hotmail.com] X-Sender: changchun_xu@hotmail.com From: "Changchun Xu" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:30:18 +0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Feb 2004 06:30:18.0754 (UTC) FILETIME=[2E330620:01C3F38D] Subject: [manet] Questions about QualNet. Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, I downloaded QualNet Developer Evaluation for Ad hoc simulation. But the functionalities of evaluation version are restricted. I'v posted several mails to sales@scalable-networks.com to inquiry the price of QualNet developer but still have no reponses yet. I'm a PHD candidate from china,who can give me the price informations about QualNet? Thank you! Your sincerely, Changchun, _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Feb 15 07:29:03 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06664 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:29:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsLNx-0004xN-JJ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:28:33 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1FCSXrS019049 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:28:33 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsLNx-0004xA-F3 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:28:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06655 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:28:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsLNw-0000PF-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:28:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsLMz-0000LU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:27:34 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsLMd-0000I0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:27:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsLMT-0004jC-Qw; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:27:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsLLy-0004gw-IR for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:26:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06601 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:26:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsLLx-0000Gj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:26:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsLL0-0000Cv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:25:31 -0500 Received: from gehenna.ece.cornell.edu ([128.84.95.235]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsLKC-00009r-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:24:40 -0500 Received: from verdi (verdi.ece.cornell.edu [128.84.210.27]) by gehenna.ece.cornell.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E98A71E8006; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:24:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 07:22:42 -0500 (EST) From: "haas@ece.cornell.edu" To: =?iso-8859-1?q?chitra=20balakrishnan?= Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols In-Reply-To: <20040213153210.24578.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi Chita, Take a look at the IRTF ANS web page: http://www.flarion.com/ans-research/ This might be helpful. Zygmunt. ===--==-=== ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- Prof. Zygmunt J. Haas http://people.ece.cornell.edu/haas Wireless Networks Laboratory http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu School of Electrical Engineering Cornell University tel: +1-607-255-3454 323 Frank Rhodes Hall fax: +1-607-255-9072 Ithaca, NY 14853 e-mail: haas@ece.cornell.edu U.S.A WNL web page: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of chitra balakrishnan > Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:50 AM > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] Simulation and comaprison of ad hoc routing protocols > > > Hi all, > I am about to begin my project proposal for my masters. I have decided to work on simulation of ad hoc routng protocols and a performance evaluation done on them based on issues relating to scalability and control overhead. Can anyone point me to resources which will guide me in choosing the protocols i should simulate inorder to comapare and analyse the above parameters. > > Thanks, > Chitra _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 01:40:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16251 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:40:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AscQK-00054B-Ja for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:40:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1G6e8Lk019469 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:40:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AscQJ-00053w-MF for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:40:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16238 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:40:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AscQG-0001fx-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:40:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AscPH-0001cN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:39:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AscOY-0001Za-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:38:18 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AscOJ-0004oM-55; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:38:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AscNR-0004Y0-3K for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:37:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16136 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:37:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AscNN-0001WM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:37:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AscMQ-0001Sw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:36:07 -0500 Received: from bay12-f30.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.30] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AscM0-0001P6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:35:40 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 22:35:10 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 06:35:09 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 12:05:09 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2004 06:35:10.0043 (UTC) FILETIME=[063BF2B0:01C3F457] Subject: [manet] Help regarding trace files Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Dear all, Please help me how could i read traces of routing protocols in MANET AODV,DSR, DSDV, TORA to calculate parameters like end-to-end delay, end-to-end throughput. i am using the old trace format for all these protocols. i have used tracegraph for reading these traces but the traces are too large that system hangs and does nothing. Please help me as early so that i can develop my own code for calculating these parameters. Thanx in advance ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Think Marriage! Think BharatMatrimony.com http://www.bharatmatrimony.com/cgi-bin/bmclicks1.cgi?74 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 02:32:57 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA01595 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:32:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsdEz-0006u0-8K for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:32:29 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1G7WTUc026521 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:32:29 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsdEx-0006tg-PO for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:32:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA01440 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:32:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdEt-0004am-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:32:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdDg-0004MZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:31:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdCp-0004Iy-02 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:30:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asd7o-0004v2-KT; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:25:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asd6p-0004gT-On for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:24:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00620 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:24:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asd6l-0003pd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:23:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Asd5o-0003mq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:23:01 -0500 Received: from patty.levels.unisa.edu.au ([130.220.36.156]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asd52-0003kk-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:22:13 -0500 Received: from jupiter (jupiter [172.17.2.15]) by patty.levels.unisa.edu.au (8.12.10/8.12.2) with SMTP id i1G7M4RW006429; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:52:04 +1030 (CST) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:52:04 +1030 (CST) From: Peter Pham To: Karun Verma cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Help regarding trace files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi You should use awk to grep the result that you want. The good side of it is it never crash ..:-)..You can easily find the sample awk script fron the ns-2 mailing list by searching the archive Best Regards. Peter Phuc Pham ========================================== On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Karun Verma wrote: > > Dear all, > > Please help me how could i read traces of routing protocols in MANET > AODV,DSR, DSDV, TORA to calculate parameters like end-to-end delay, > end-to-end throughput. i am using the old trace format for all these > protocols. i have used tracegraph for reading these traces but the traces > are too large that system hangs and does nothing. Please help me as early so > that i can develop my own code for calculating these parameters. > Thanx in advance > ############################################ > > # Karun Verma > # > > ########################################### > > _________________________________________________________________ > Think Marriage! Think BharatMatrimony.com > http://www.bharatmatrimony.com/cgi-bin/bmclicks1.cgi?74 > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 02:48:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03086 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:48:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsdU8-0000sV-2m for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:48:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1G7m8rW003369 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:48:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsdU7-0000sG-PP for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:48:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03053 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:48:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdU3-0006Fq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:48:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdT7-0006BY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:47:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdSG-00067e-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:46:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsdS7-0000Wg-Rh; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:46:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsdRD-0000Uo-2p for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:45:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA02880 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:45:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdR9-00063H-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:45:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdQE-0005zR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:44:07 -0500 Received: from web41205.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.38]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsdPc-0005tZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:43:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20040216074259.80527.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [203.124.208.194] by web41205.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:42:59 PST Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:42:59 -0800 (PST) From: Anand To: "haas@ece.cornell.edu" Cc: manet In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] Implementing SAODV Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, I am trying to implement SAODV using Glomosim. I have implemented Hash chain partially but i don't know how to create a malicious node which selectively drops some packets or doing something in the message and also i need to compare the existing AODV with the SAODV implementation.And regarding digital signature still i don't have any idea.. kindly help me in this regarding.. thanks anand __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 05:19:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09612 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:19:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsfqH-0002Iw-GO for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:19:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GAJ997008857 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:19:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsfqH-0002Im-AH for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:19:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09582 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:19:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsfqD-0000vv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:19:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsfpF-0000r8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:18:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsfoK-0000nx-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:17:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsfoD-0001mK-GS; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:17:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsfnL-0001lO-Uq for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:16:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09530 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:16:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsfnI-0000kC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:16:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsfmK-0000hH-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:15:05 -0500 Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsflP-0000c4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 05:14:07 -0500 Received: from zephyrin (byzantium.inria.fr [128.93.17.6]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1GADbae015194; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:13:37 +0100 Message-ID: <037d01c3f475$c9f47ce0$1f175d80@inria.fr> From: "Philippe Jacquet" To: "mailhost.sce.carleton.ca" , References: <000b01c3f258$1eb52e20$4e85e683@cs.siu.edu> <002b01c3f260$09efd280$a73d7586@sce.carleton.ca> Subject: Re: [manet] Average time of topology convergence in a proactive protocol Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:15:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_037A_01C3F47E.2AEF7A60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_037A_01C3F47E.2AEF7A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Average node disconnection time in manetHello, Carlos. This is mainly a problem of neighbor sensing and this is mostly common = to proactive and reactive protocols. If you have the possibility of link = failure notification from link layer, then the time is immediate. If the = neighbor sensing uses only hello mechanism then the time can vary. In = OLSR it is parametrable in the parameter NEIGH_HOLD_TIME and = HELLO_INTERVAL. The smallest time is 1/16 sec. The largest possible is = 2^32 sec (137 years). Typical 6 sec is what is mentioned in the draft. = When the node figures out the link fading the propagation of the = information is almost instantaneous in the network (provided some time = jitter in retransmissions in order to avoid.collisions). =20 Best regards, Philippe ----- Original Message -----=20 From: mailhost.sce.carleton.ca=20 To: manet@ietf.org=20 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 7:34 PM Subject: [manet] Average time of topology convergence in a proactive = protocol Hello, =20 Can anyone point me to papers or references to find out what is the = time it takes for a proactive protocol like OLSR to figure out that a = change has ocurred in the topology or the link connections of the = network? at least the time scale : msec, seconds, days, years?, assuming = whatever there is to assume (say number of nodes) =20 Thanks =20 Carlos ------=_NextPart_000_037A_01C3F47E.2AEF7A60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Average node disconnection time in manet
Hello, Carlos.
 
This is mainly a problem of neighbor = sensing and=20 this is mostly common to proactive and reactive protocols. If you have = the=20 possibility of link failure notification from link layer, then the time = is=20 immediate. If the neighbor sensing uses only hello mechanism then the = time can=20 vary. In OLSR it is parametrable in the parameter NEIGH_HOLD_TIME and=20 HELLO_INTERVAL. The smallest time is 1/16 sec. The largest possible = is 2^32=20 sec (137 years). Typical 6 sec is what is mentioned in the = draft. When=20 the node figures out the link fading the propagation of the information = is=20 almost instantaneous in the network (provided some time jitter in=20 retransmissions in order to avoid.collisions).  
 
Best regards,
Philippe
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 mailhost.sce.carleton.ca
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 = 7:34=20 PM
Subject: [manet] Average time = of topology=20 convergence in a proactive protocol

Hello,
 
Can anyone point me to papers or = references to=20 find out what is the time it takes for a proactive protocol like OLSR = to=20 figure out that a change has ocurred in the topology or the link = connections=20 of the network? at least the time scale : msec, seconds, days, years?, = assuming whatever there is to assume (say number of = nodes)
 
Thanks
 
Carlos
------=_NextPart_000_037A_01C3F47E.2AEF7A60-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 07:08:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA13333 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:08:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AshXp-0000ba-Nt for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:08:16 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GC8Daf002320 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:08:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AshXp-0000b9-8G for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:08:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA13261 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:08:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AshXk-0006et-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:08:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AshWl-0006ZR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:07:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AshVo-0006Uw-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:06:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AshVj-0008KE-GZ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:06:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AshUz-0008Is-Eu for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:05:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA13128 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:05:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AshUv-0006RO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:05:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AshU0-0006OB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:04:16 -0500 Received: from pri-dns.cs.iitm.ernet.in ([202.141.25.89] helo=cello.cs.iitm.ernet.in) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AshTe-0006L6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 07:03:55 -0500 Received: from rts.cs.iitm.ernet.in (rts.cs.iitm.ernet.in [10.6.6.3]) by cello.cs.iitm.ernet.in (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i1GC85SB025744 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:38:05 +0530 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:46:55 +0530 (IST) From: "B.VenkataRamana" To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] interaction between IP & Any routing protocol Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 hi can you please tell me, how does Internet Protocol(IP) interact with AODV or any other routing protocol when it is required to forward a data packet?. please tell me for both cases, when route info is available in the table, when the route info is NOT available in the routing table. finally, any changes/modifications are required for IP to work with the routing protocols of MANETs. sincerely Venkataramana _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 14:23:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA12880 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:23:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoKb-0008Ct-7C for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:23:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GJN1Nu031542 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:23:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoKb-0008Cf-32 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:23:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA12852 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:22:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoKY-0003mz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:22:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoJe-0003fc-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:22:03 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoIs-0003Xg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:21:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoIg-0007l8-JB; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:21:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoIQ-0007jP-7J for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:20:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA12616 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:20:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoIN-0003Ug-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:20:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoHE-0003Mh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:19:32 -0500 Received: from xenia.media.mit.edu ([18.85.3.135]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoGX-0003I0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:18:49 -0500 Received: from Helium ([61.17.122.115]) by xenia.media.mit.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/XENIA) with ESMTP id i1GJIfnA190290; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:18:43 -0500 (EST) From: "Ankur Jain" To: "Karun Verma" Cc: "Manet@Ietf. Org" Subject: RE: [manet] Help regarding trace files Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:51:04 +0530 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24 autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Karun, You can try a software written by me - NANS. www.geocities.com/ankurjain009 and go to Projects section. If the traces are too large, then this program may also hang. In that case, the best way is to write your own awk/Perl scripts and use x-graph/GNUPlot to display the graphs. There are some sample scripts given on Llyod Wood website, which may serve your purpose. If you need more information, do let me know. Regards, Ankur -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Karun Verma Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 12:05 PM To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] Help regarding trace files Dear all, Please help me how could i read traces of routing protocols in MANET AODV,DSR, DSDV, TORA to calculate parameters like end-to-end delay, end-to-end throughput. i am using the old trace format for all these protocols. i have used tracegraph for reading these traces but the traces are too large that system hangs and does nothing. Please help me as early so that i can develop my own code for calculating these parameters. Thanx in advance ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Think Marriage! Think BharatMatrimony.com http://www.bharatmatrimony.com/cgi-bin/bmclicks1.cgi?74 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 14:30:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13644 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:30:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoRJ-0000oa-1K for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:29:57 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GJTvfL003126 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:29:57 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoRI-0000oL-TJ for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:29:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13581 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:29:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoRF-0004nU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:29:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoQR-0004fh-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:29:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoPV-0004V4-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:28:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoPR-0000B2-Ol; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsoPC-000095-BS for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:27:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13254 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:27:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoP9-0004Rq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:27:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoNw-0004ES-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:26:29 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsoMy-000412-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:25:29 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1GJOwQ07782; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:24:58 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402161924> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdFUId3g; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:24:54 PST Message-ID: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:24:44 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group CC: "Joseph P. Macker" , "M. Scott Corson" , Pascale Minet , Thomas Clausen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello folks, After a long gestation, an initial revision of our proposal for more scalable flooding has finally made it into the Internet Drafts directory. MPRF ("Multi-point Relay Flooding") has the following goals: - Scalable flooding - Intended to work with AODV, OLSR, DSR, and TBRPF albeit with perhaps some minor modifications - Works in networks that contain nodes that are not MPRF-aware - Fits well within IP, allowing forwarding for TTL>1 without requiring application processing - Allows layer-2 broadcast (instead of iterated unicast tunneling) when possible - Allows for parametrizable redundant coverage to help overcome the deficiencies of unreliable broadcast - Works for all upper layer protocols without requiring IP to make decisions based on the payload. It is the authors' intention that even this fairly rough initial draft may help to ease future protocol convergence within [manet]. A significant difficulty with the current algorithm is that a node may be a MPR for some of its neighbors but not for other neighbors. It would greatly simplify the algorithm if we could identify a useful mechanism by which a node is either a MPR or not, and all of its neighbors would agree on that status. If that happens, then there will no longer be a need for the MPR node to determine which of its neighbors transmitted the flooded packet. As it is, we need this determination. When the identification cannot be made by inspecting the source address in the MAC header, the flooded packet has to be tunneled. Comments will, as always, be appreciated. If it is found to be useful, we would like to see this protocol document be considered as a working group draft. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 14:50:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA15150 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:50:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asokb-0003nQ-S0 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:49:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GJnrw5014586 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:49:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asokb-0003nB-MM for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:49:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA15119 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:49:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsokY-0006fa-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:49:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Asojo-0006Zd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:49:05 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asoj8-0006RW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:48:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asoio-0003Bq-Ck; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:48:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asoid-0003B8-O3 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:47:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA14841 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:47:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asoia-0006O4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:47:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsohZ-0006GG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:46:45 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asogk-00063U-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:45:55 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1GJjLk04669 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:45:21 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402161945> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpd7K3qUN; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:45:20 PST Message-ID: <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:45:10 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello again, I should have mentioned, that the draft is available now at: http://people.nokia.net/charliep/txt/mprf/mprf.txt Regards, Charlie P. "Charles E. Perkins" wrote: > > Hello folks, > > After a long gestation, an initial revision of our > proposal for more scalable flooding has finally made > it into the Internet Drafts directory. > > MPRF ("Multi-point Relay Flooding") has the following > goals: > - Scalable flooding > - Intended to work with AODV, OLSR, DSR, and TBRPF > albeit with perhaps some minor modifications > - Works in networks that contain nodes that are not > MPRF-aware > - Fits well within IP, allowing forwarding for TTL>1 > without requiring application processing > - Allows layer-2 broadcast (instead of iterated > unicast tunneling) when possible > - Allows for parametrizable redundant coverage > to help overcome the deficiencies of unreliable > broadcast > - Works for all upper layer protocols without > requiring IP to make decisions based on the > payload. > > It is the authors' intention that even this fairly > rough initial draft may help to ease future protocol > convergence within [manet]. > > A significant difficulty with the current algorithm > is that a node may be a MPR for some of its neighbors > but not for other neighbors. It would greatly > simplify the algorithm if we could identify a > useful mechanism by which a node is either a MPR > or not, and all of its neighbors would agree on > that status. If that happens, then there will no > longer be a need for the MPR node to determine which > of its neighbors transmitted the flooded packet. > As it is, we need this determination. When the > identification cannot be made by inspecting the > source address in the MAC header, the flooded > packet has to be tunneled. > > Comments will, as always, be appreciated. If it > is found to be useful, we would like to see this > protocol document be considered as a working group > draft. > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 15:34:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18566 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:34:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AspQz-00010V-CY for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:33:41 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GKXffl003871 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:33:41 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AspQz-00010K-5b for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:33:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18477 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:33:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AspQx-0001m0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:33:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AspQ3-0001i3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:32:44 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AspPj-0001dl-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:32:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AspPO-0000ka-LO; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:32:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AspP3-0000jx-KZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:31:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18370 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:31:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AspP2-0001cX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:31:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AspO3-0001Yf-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:30:40 -0500 Received: from mail.ee.gatech.edu ([130.207.225.105]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AspNn-0001Ud-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:30:23 -0500 Received: from yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu (yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu [130.207.232.10]) by mail.ee.gatech.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1GKU2oR005554 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:30:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (jau@localhost) by yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu (8.12.0.Beta19/8.12.0.Beta19/Submit) with ESMTP id i1GJaL8h005570 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:36:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:36:21 -0500 (EST) From: Jaudelice Cavalcante de Oliveira To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-SPAM: NO Subject: [manet] Med-Hoc-Net 2004 CFP - Deadline is fast approaching Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR autolearn=no version=2.60 My sincere apologies if you have received multiple copies of this message. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Med-Hoc-Net 2004 ================ The Third Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop June 27-30, 2004, Bodrum, Turkey http://www.medhoc04.diit.unict.it/ Call for Papers --------------- Ad hoc network applications are emerging continuously imposing their own stringent constraints which cannot be fulfilled by generic approaches and thus spur new research efforts. The aim of Med-Hoc-Net 2004 is to serve as a platform for researchers and visionaries from academia, research labs, and industry from all over the globe to share their ideas, views, results, and experiences in the field of ad-hoc networking and communications. Med-Hoc-Net 2004 will include presentations of theoretical and experimental achievements, innovative ad-hoc systems, prototyping efforts, case studies, and advancements in technology directly affecting ad-hoc networking and communications infrastructures. After Sardinia (Italy) and Mahdia (Tunisia), this year the workshop will take place in another beautiful spot on the Mediterranean Sea: Bodrum (Turkey) where you will find wonderful nature and amazing historical sites close to hand. Bodrum is easy to reach via frequent flight connections from Istanbul. Topics of Interest: ------------------- The papers solicited in Med-Hoc-Net 2004 cover a variety of topics including but not limited to: - Novel ad-hoc network architectures and applications, - Sensor network applications and protocols, - Implementations, testbeds, and prototypes, - Interfacing ad-hoc systems with different networks, - Resource discovery and management, - Power management and control, - Call admission and traffic shaping policies for ad-hoc networks, - Multimedia location services, - Self organization and network reconfiguration, - Protocols for QoS support in ad-hoc networks, - QoS support in Bluetooth, HIPERLAN, IEEE 802.11, etc., - MAC protocols, scheduling, and radio resource sharing in ad hoc networks, - Unicast and multicast routing algorithms and protocols, - Transport layer protocols for multi-hop networks, - Congestion control, - Performance evaluation of ad-hoc network protocols through simulations, analysis, and measurements, - Security in ad-hoc networks, - Fault tolerance and error recovery - Signal processing algorithms (coding, compression) for ad-hoc networks The program committee will referee all papers, and accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings. PAPERS OF PARTICULAR MERIT WILL BE PUBLISHED IN AD HOC NETWORKS (ELSEVIER) JOURNAL. Submission and Important Dates: ------------------------------- Manuscripts must be formatted according to the IEEE double-column standard format, except the font size, which must be 11pt. Authors should use only standard fonts, i.e., Times Roman, Courier, Symbol, and Helvetica, or their equivalent. The maximum length of the manuscript is 12 (double-column) pages. Papers should be submitted in pdf or ps format via email to medhoc04@diit.unict.it according to the following timetable: Full Paper Electronic Submission: March 2, 2004 Notification of Acceptance/Rejection: May 3, 2004 Camera ready submission of full papers: May 17, 2004 Tutorial date: June 27, 2004 Conference dates: June 28-30, 2004 Keynote Speakers: ----------------- Leonard Kleinrock (UCLA, USA), and Imrich Chlamtac (UTDallas, USA). Steering Committee: ------------------- Khaldoun Al Agha (LRI, France), Mario Gerla (UCLA, USA), Farouk Kamoun (ENSI, Tunisia), Giovanni Pau (UCLA, USA), and Guy Pujolle (LIP6, France). Organization Committee: ----------------------- General Chair: Ian F. Akyildiz, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA General Vice Chair: Erdal Cayirci, Istanbul Technical University, TURKEY Technical Program Chairs: Giacomo Morabito, University of Catania, ITALY Eylem Ekici, Ohio State University, USA Tutorial Chairs: Francesca Cuomo, University of Rome - La Sapienza, ITALY Christos Douligeris, University of Piraeus, GREECE Publicity Chairs: Buyurman Baykal, Middle East Technical University, TURKEY Jaudelice Cavalcante de Oliveira, Drexel University, USA Registration Chair: Sebnem Baydere, Yeditepe University, TURKEY Technical Program Committee: ---------------------------- Khaldoun Al Agha, Laboratoire de Recherche en Informatique, FRANCE Hamid Aghvami, King's College London, UK Eitan Altman, INRIA, FRANCE Roberto Battiti, University of Trento, ITALY Raouf Boutaba, University of Waterloo, CANADA Walid Dabbous, INRIA, FRANCE Magda El Zarki, University of California at Irvine, USA Luigi Fratta, Politecnico di Milano, ITALY Mario Gerla, UCLA, USA Paul J. M. Havinga, University of Twente, NETHERLANDS Farouk Kamoun, ENSI, TUNISIA Holger Karl, Technical University of Berlin, GERMANY Ulf Korner, Lund Institute of Technology, SWEDEN Bhaskar Krishnamachari, University of Southern California, USA Marwan Krunz, University of Arizona, USA Albert Levi, Sabanci University, TURKEY Janise McNair, University of Florida, USA Lazaros Merakos, University of Athens, GREECE Ioanis Nikolaidis, University of Alberta, CANADA Ariel Orda, Technion, ISRAEL Sergio Palazzo, University of Catania, ITALY Giovanni Pau, UCLA, USA Chiara Petrioli, University of Rome "La Sapienza", ITALY Andreas Pitsillides, University of Cyprus, CYPRUS Guy Pujolle, LIP6, FRANCE Paolo Santi, CNR, ITALY Adrian Segall, Technion, ISRAEL Ness Shroff, Purdue University, USA Moshe Sidi, Technion, ISRAEL Raghupathy Sivakumar, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA Ioannis Stavrakakis, University of Athens, GREECE Ivan Stojmenovic, University of Ottawa, CANADA Violet R. Syrotiuk, Arizona State University, USA Leandros Tassiulas, University of Thessaly, GREECE Bernhard H. Walke, Aachen University of Technology, GERMANY Wenye Wang, North Carolina State University, USA Michele Zorzi, University of Ferrara, ITALY -------------------------------------------------- For more information on the workshop, please check http://www.medhoc04.diit.unict.it/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 16:22:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26760 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:22:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsqBW-0007qW-1j for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:21:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1GLLkBA030160 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:21:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsqBV-0007qN-9z for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:21:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26743 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:21:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsqBT-0001u6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:21:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AsqA2-0001d0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:20:15 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asq9A-0001Rn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:19:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asq8t-0007Ha-7q; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:19:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asq8R-0007Fx-UY for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:18:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26178 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:18:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asq8Q-0001Jl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:18:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Asq6f-0000wy-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:16:46 -0500 Received: from mailgate-internal2.sri.com ([128.18.84.104]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asq4Z-0000VX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:14:35 -0500 Received: (qmail 19891 invoked from network); 16 Feb 2004 21:14:33 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mailgate-internal2.SRI.COM) (127.0.0.1) by mailgate-internal2.sri.com with SMTP; 16 Feb 2004 21:14:33 -0000 Received: from newmail.sri.com ([128.18.30.43]) by mailgate-internal2.SRI.COM (SAVSMTP 3.1.2.35) with SMTP id M2004021613143302530 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:14:33 -0800 Received: from erg.sri.com (rogier-pc-ek356.SRI.COM [128.18.6.98]) by newmail.sri.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HT700GO64C9M2@newmail.sri.com> for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:14:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:18:34 -0800 From: Richard Ogier Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision In-reply-to: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> To: "Charles E. Perkins" Cc: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Message-id: <403133AA.2050707@erg.sri.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en,pdf User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hello Charlie, Charles E. Perkins wrote: >A significant difficulty with the current algorithm >is that a node may be a MPR for some of its neighbors >but not for other neighbors. It would greatly >simplify the algorithm if we could identify a >useful mechanism by which a node is either a MPR >or not, and all of its neighbors would agree on >that status. If that happens, then there will no >longer be a need for the MPR node to determine which >of its neighbors transmitted the flooded packet. > As you know, there exist algorithms for selecting a connected dominating set (CDS) based on 2-hop neighbor information. (Some of these are cited in draft-ogier-manet-ospf-extension-00.txt.) This would result in MPRs that all neighbors agree on, i.e., source-independent MPRs. Although none of the published CDS algorithms appears to be ideal for this purpose, I have been experimenting with some variations that appear promising. (These are not yet published but I can email you their descriptions if you want to experiment with them.) But I wonder whether a CDS (or source-independent MPRs) is really appropriate for AODV, since it does not provide a min-hop path whose intermediate nodes are all MPRs. I.e., if route discovery in AODV were done by flooding a Route Request via CDS nodes, then you discover a path that uses only CDS nodes, but the path could have much more than the minimum number of hops. A CDS is most useful if you want to flood efficiently (with minimum number of transmissions) and don't care if the flooded packet reaches each node in the minimum number of hops. Therefore, I think a CDS is useful for link-state routing (to flood link states efficiently) and for general flooding purposes, but am not sure if it is appropriate for AODV and DSR. Also, I am still wondering whether MPRs should be selected by neighbors (as in OLSR) or whether each MPR should select itself based on 2-hop neighbor information (as in TBRPF). The latter approach has some potential advantages which have been discussed on this mailing list, such as faster convergence following link failures, and avoiding the overhead of reporting MPRs to neighbors. I think the relative performance of the two approaches should be compared in simulations before deciding which approach to use. Regard, Richard _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 16 21:20:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA20238 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsuqY-0003y0-Py for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:27 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1H2KQYu015247 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsuqY-0003xq-LG for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA20198 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsuqV-0000w2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Asuov-0000e2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:18:46 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AsuoQ-0000ai-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:18:14 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AsuoR-0008Jw-Dw for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:18:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AsuoD-0003ew-Rl; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:18:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Asunv-0003cP-TQ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:17:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA20143 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:17:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asunt-0000aJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:17:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Asun1-0000Y9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:16:47 -0500 Received: from smtp4.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.22.27] helo=mwinf0403.wanadoo.fr) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Asume-0000Ux-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:16:24 -0500 Received: from n0rg.org (APastourelles-107-1-3-105.w193-251.abo.wanadoo.fr [193.251.53.105]) by mwinf0403.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0AB6350002FE; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 03:15:54 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <40317958.6050207@n0rg.org> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 03:15:52 +0100 From: Laurent Dehoey User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Cc: adhoc@n0rg.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Which Protocol Behind AirCQ ? Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Does some one has some information about the manet protocol that is underlying the AirCQ ad hoc Instant Messaging Software ? One of their web site page states : [AirCQ] Displays the number of hops away you are from your AirCQ friends. Is the underlying routing protocol a member of the proactive or the reactive family ? How is the IP @ acquired ? Do they have implemented some form of "Weak DAD" ? I understand that they use the latest Microsoft NDIS drivers extensively but i cannot figure out to what extent Just wondering TIA LD PS: a 30 days windows demo is available at http://www.aircq.com/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 02:20:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA13073 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:20:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AszWS-0004hZ-Ao for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:20:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1H7K0pw018051 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:20:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AszWQ-0004e8-KH for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:19:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA13031 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:19:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AszWM-0003o3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:19:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AszVP-0003kI-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:18:56 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AszUp-0003gt-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:18:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AszUZ-0003fw-8b; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:18:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AszUT-0003dz-GS for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:17:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA12895 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:17:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AszUP-0003ge-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:17:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AszTW-0003ds-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:16:58 -0500 Received: from patty.levels.unisa.edu.au ([130.220.36.156]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AszT0-0003aS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 02:16:27 -0500 Received: from server1 (server1 [172.17.0.2]) by patty.levels.unisa.edu.au (8.12.10/8.12.2) with SMTP id i1H7GORW012215; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:46:24 +1030 (CST) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:46:24 +1030 (CST) From: Peter Pham To: ns-users@isi.edu cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <40317958.6050207@n0rg.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] Difference of 802.11 in ns2.19b and 2-26 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi I am sending to both mailing list because I think that it is very important issue. When comparing the two version of 802.11 in ns2.19 and ns2-26 (in mac-802_11.cc), I noticed that whenever defer starts in ns2-26, it has an additional value of rTime = (Random::random() * cw_)..which is the random number of slot times. Whereas, in ns2.19b, it does not have this values. Clearly, this affects the performance of 802.11 My question is which one is correct. I knew that in ns2-26 it contains other bugs. However, I am not sure about this one...I tend to agree that the ns2-26 version is correct. I appreciate that anyone can clarify on this. Best Regards. Peter Phuc Pham _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 10:08:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02143 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:08:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At6pa-0002x6-Uq for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:08:15 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HF8EO0011339 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:08:14 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At6pa-0002wj-Hx for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:08:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02087 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:08:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At6pX-0006Md-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:08:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At6oi-0006Ho-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:07:21 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At6nt-0006CQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:06:29 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At6nU-0001zB-1C; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:06:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At6n7-0001su-GS for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:05:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA01681 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:05:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At6n5-00064v-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:05:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At6m9-0005uC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:04:41 -0500 Received: from web41803.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.137]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At6kh-0005b9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:03:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20040217150240.70775.qmail@web41803.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [213.150.176.6] by web41803.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:02:40 CET Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:02:40 +0100 (CET) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?ines=20benbrahim?= To: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040216170005.22513.95949.Mailman@www1.ietf.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-925781835-1077030160=:70523" Subject: [manet] MPR+DSDV Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-925781835-1077030160=:70523 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id KAA01684 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi every body i need your help, i am studying now the possibility of using MPR in DSDV = protocol. can u help me to realize this implementation in ns-2.26 thank u a lot =20 =09 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! Cr=E9ez votre Yahoo! Mail --0-925781835-1077030160=:70523 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id KAA01684 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

hi every body

i need your help, i am studying now the possibility of using MPR in DS= DV protocol. can u help me to realize this implementation in ns-2.26

thank u a lot

 

Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout !
Cr=E9ez votre Yahoo! Mail --0-925781835-1077030160=:70523-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 12:06:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA17780 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:06:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At8fo-0004zh-F6 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:06:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HH6GSI019196 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:06:16 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At8fo-0004zW-Bn for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:06:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA17656 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:06:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At8fn-0006g6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:06:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At8e3-0006M1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:04:28 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At8cU-00060D-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:02:50 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At8b8-0003Mh-LS; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:01:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At8aB-0002xn-C4 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:00:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA17002 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:00:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At8aA-0005YQ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:00:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At8ZF-0005Ok-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:59:29 -0500 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.232]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At8YI-0005Gh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:58:30 -0500 Received: from user-2ivfm7s.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.216.252] helo=erg.sri.com) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1At8YF-0001UA-00; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:58:28 -0800 Message-ID: <4032482E.3010502@erg.sri.com> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:58:22 -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: ines benbrahim CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPR+DSDV References: <20040217150240.70775.qmail@web41803.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id MAA17003 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I thought about combining MPRs with distance-vector routing (e.g., DSDV) a few years ago, but I haven't seen it published anywhere. If MPRs are computed as in OLSR or TBRPF, then each node only needs to report the distances to a subset of destinations, i.e., to nodes u such that the next hop to u is an MPR selector. This is analogous to TBRPF in which each node reports only links on paths to a subset of destinations that is defined similarly. BTW, if this is a new idea and anyone uses it in a paper, please acknowledge this email. Richard Ogier SRI International ines benbrahim wrote: > hi every body > > i need your help, i am studying now the possibility of using MPR in=20 > DSDV protocol. can u help me to realize this implementation in ns-2.26 > > thank u a lot > > =20 > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= - > Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! > Cr=E9ez votre Yahoo! Mail=20 > =20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 12:33:43 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20164 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:33:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At95t-0007cS-Qn for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:33:16 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HHXDXv029287 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:33:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At95t-0007cI-K4 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:33:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20091 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:33:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At95s-00027j-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:33:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At94t-0001zg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:32:12 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At93x-0001tP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:31:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At93l-0007E7-SI; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:31:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At935-0007Bs-Ms for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:30:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19840 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:30:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At934-0001nT-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:30:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At92E-0001i4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:29:28 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At91M-0001X4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:28:32 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1HHRKjS006084; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:27:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004021712273322222 ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:27:33 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20040217122039.02dbc9e8@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:27:46 -0500 To: "Charles E. Perkins" , Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group From: Joe Macker Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Cc: "M. Scott Corson" , Pascale Minet , Thomas Clausen In-Reply-To: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 At 02:24 PM 2/16/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: >Hello folks, > >After a long gestation, an initial revision of our >proposal for more scalable flooding has finally made >it into the Internet Drafts directory. > >MPRF ("Multi-point Relay Flooding") has the following >goals: >- Scalable flooding >- Intended to work with AODV, OLSR, DSR, and TBRPF > albeit with perhaps some minor modifications >- Works in networks that contain nodes that are not > MPRF-aware >- Fits well within IP, allowing forwarding for TTL>1 > without requiring application processing >- Allows layer-2 broadcast (instead of iterated > unicast tunneling) when possible >- Allows for parametrizable redundant coverage > to help overcome the deficiencies of unreliable > broadcast >- Works for all upper layer protocols without > requiring IP to make decisions based on the > payload. > >It is the authors' intention that even this fairly >rough initial draft may help to ease future protocol >convergence within [manet]. > >A significant difficulty with the current algorithm >is that a node may be a MPR for some of its neighbors >but not for other neighbors. It would greatly >simplify the algorithm if we could identify a >useful mechanism by which a node is either a MPR >or not, and all of its neighbors would agree on >that status. If that happens, then there will no >longer be a need for the MPR node to determine which >of its neighbors transmitted the flooded packet. >As it is, we need this determination. When the >identification cannot be made by inspecting the >source address in the MAC header, the flooded >packet has to be tunneled. We prototyped a working approach for modified-MPR flooding. We use side information from the 2-hop neighbor management process requiring no previous hop information for forwarding. (its unpublished as of now). But we might have source code soon on-line. Yes there are lots of algorithms for this. -Joe >Comments will, as always, be appreciated. If it >is found to be useful, we would like to see this >protocol document be considered as a working group >draft. > >Regards, >Charlie P. > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 13:00:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22039 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:00:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9VX-0001i3-U5 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:59:43 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HHxh2E006565 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:59:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9VX-0001ho-Q3 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:59:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA21897 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:59:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9VV-0004Wm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:59:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At9UT-0004Lw-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:58:38 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9TE-0004FH-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:57:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9Sw-0001K6-8L; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9S8-0001JT-2R for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:56:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA21775 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:56:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9S6-0004Ac-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:56:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At9RC-00048G-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:55:14 -0500 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.22]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9Qe-00045y-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:54:40 -0500 Received: from user-38ldvcu.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.253.158] helo=erg.sri.com) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1At9QS-0002y4-00; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:54:28 -0800 Message-ID: <4032554F.9090903@erg.sri.com> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:54:23 -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: ines benbrahim CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPR+DSDV References: <20040217150240.70775.qmail@web41803.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id MAA21776 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For the method described below to be correct, I need to make one change. If there is more than one possible next hop on a shortest path to some destination, then the next hop with minimum (or maximum) node ID should be selected, so that routes are computed consistently by all nodes. (This is also why TBRPF uses node ID to break ties.) (The min node ID rule is only for deciding which destinations u to report. Packets can be forwarded along any computed shortest path.) Richard -------- Original Message -------- I thought about combining MPRs with distance-vector routing (e.g., DSDV) a few years ago, but I haven't seen it published anywhere. If MPRs are computed as in OLSR or TBRPF, then each node only needs to report the distances to a subset of destinations, i.e., to nodes u such that the next hop to u is an MPR selector. This is analogous to TBRPF in which each node reports only links on paths to a subset of destinations that is defined similarly. BTW, if this is a new idea and anyone uses it in a paper, please acknowledge this email. Richard Ogier SRI International ines benbrahim wrote: > hi every body > > i need your help, i am studying now the possibility of using MPR in=20 > DSDV protocol. can u help me to realize this implementation in ns-2.26 > > thank u a lot > > =20 > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= - > Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! > Cr=E9ez votre Yahoo! Mail=20 > =20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 13:10:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22982 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:10:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9fg-00031a-Df for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:10:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HIAC0L011620 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:10:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9fg-00031L-A0 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:10:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22932 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:10:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9fe-0005gC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:10:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At9ef-0005Z2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:09:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9di-0005Tb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:08:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9dZ-0002fD-JS; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:08:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1At9cx-0002Ts-Uz for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:07:23 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22738 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:07:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9cw-0005QG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:07:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1At9cA-0005L2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:06:35 -0500 Received: from mail.tns.net ([216.86.143.7] helo=remail.tns.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1At9bM-0005FB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:05:44 -0500 Received: from SDRCZZ (66-146-170-74.skyriver.net [66.146.170.74]) by remail.tns.net (8.12.8p1/9.4.4) with ESMTP id i1HI5WJj010631 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:05:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from zzhang@ieee.org) Message-Id: <200402171805.i1HI5WJj010631@remail.tns.net> From: "Zhensheng Zhang" To: Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:05:31 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Thread-index: AcP1f7mZ/T8pcY/CQmOQoRMHnWJs0AAAIe8g In-Reply-To: <4032554F.9090903@erg.sri.com> X-Milter: Spamilter Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] CFP: Broadband Wireless Networking Symposium 2004 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,LINES_OF_YELLING, LINES_OF_YELLING_2,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please accept our apologies for potential multiple receipt of this announcement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CALL FOR PAPERS BroadNets 2004 Broadband Wireless Networking Symposium 2004 October 25 - 29, 2004 San Jose, California, USA www.broadnets.org Submission Deadline: March 15, 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SCOPE ----- BroadNets 2004 is a new conference focusing on broadband networking and covers the entire gamut of next generation networks with ultra-high bandwidth available all the way from access networks (xDSL, Cable, EPON, Broadband Wireless, multi-Gigabit uplinks), to regional and metropolitan networks to wide-area core networks. The conference will consist of the following two symposia: ** Broadband Wireless Networking that is defined to cover high-speed wireless networking for access, regional and backhaul networks including backhaul capacity provisioning using wireless, including the WLAN networks and WMAN. ** Broadband Optical Networking includes WDM technologies, Ethernet and MPLS integration into the optical layer, Next-Gen SONET/SDH, as well as SAN extentions over DWDM/SONET/SDH. BroadNets 2004 will thus offer a unique forum for researchers from academia, government and industry to share ideas and disseminate new results in these important areas. In addition to expansion in scope, BroadNets 2004 will expand its target audience by encouraging industry contributions, through architecture and position papers. More details can be found at www.broadnets.org. This Call for Papers describes the details for the Broadband Wireless Networking Symposium ONLY. (Refer to the broadnets.org website for the Broadband Optical Symposium details.) We are soliciting full papers in all research, development, and deployment areas on broadband wireless networking. Applications/position/system papers from industry are also encouraged. Topics of interest include, but not limited to, the following: - 3G/4G Systems - Fixed Broadband Wireless Access - Wireless Local Area Networks - WLAN Hotspots - Wireless indoor & home networks - Wireless Personal Area Networks including IEEE 802.15 - IEEE 802.16 (WiMax) Standards Activities and Products - Wireless Metropolitan Area Networks - Wireless Wide Area Networks - Free-Space Optics - Ultra Wideband (UWB) Networks - Ad-hoc networks - Cellular mobile/WLAN interoperability - System architecture - Network Topology management - Neighbour discovery - Unicast and multicast routing - Quality-of-Service support - Security techniques and systems - Resource management - Software-defined radio - Space-time processing, MIMO systems - Digital signal processing - Smart (directional) antennas - Power control - Wireless emergency systems - Standards, Licensing and regulation - Interference mitigation for multiple access - Economics and business cases IMPORTANT DATES --------------- Full papers due: March 15, 2004 Notification of acceptance: June 7, 2004 Final manuscript due: July 7, 2004 Conference Dates: October 25 - 29, 2004 PAPER SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS ----------------------------- Authors are invited to submit full papers of up to 20 double-spaced pages, including references, figures and tables. All submissions should be submitted electronically to EDAS system at http://edas.info/Conferences.cgi and in Postscript or Adobe PDF format. Papers of particular merit will be considered for a special issue of ACM/Kluwer Mobile Networks (MONET) Journal. PROPOSALS FOR WORKSHOPS, TUTORIALS AND PANELS --------------------------------------------- Proposals for workshops, tutorials and panels on broadband wireless networking and related topics are solicited. Contact information for respective Chairs can be found at www.broadnets.org. Workshop proposals should consist of: 1) title of the workshop, 2) description of potential audience, 3) description of the workshop topic and justification of why the proposed topic is interesting and timely and, 4) intended format of the workshop. Please submit your proposals to the appropriate Chairs by March 1, 2004. Tutorial proposals should consist of: 1) title and outline of materials to be presented, 2) description of potential audience, 3) justification of why the proposed topic is interesting and timely and, 4) biographical sketch of the presenter(s). Please submit your proposals to the appropriate Chairs by May 1, 2004. Panel topics should address innovative, controversial, or otherwise provocative issues of interest related to broadband wireless networking and communications. Please submit your proposals to the appropriate Chairs by May 1, 2004. CONFERENCE INFORMATION ---------------------- For the general information about the organization of the BroadNets 2004 conference, please visit http://www.broadnets.org or contact one of the conference chairs listed below (more details are on the website). CONFERENCE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE ------------------------------- BroadNets Conference General Chair: Dr. Raj Jain, Nayna Networks/Ohio State University, raj@nayna.com Broadband Wireless Networking Symposium Chair: Dr. Zhensheng Zhang, San Diego Research Center, zzhang@ieee.org Technical Program Co-Chairs: Dr. Parameswaran Ramanathan, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, parmesh@ece.wisc.edu Dr. Thomas Hou, Virginia Tech, thou@vt.edu Panels Co-Chairs: Dr. Byrav Ramamurthy, University of Nebraska - Lincoln, byrav@cse.unl.edu Dr. Loukas Paraschis, Cisco Systems, loukas@cisco.com Tutorials Co-Chairs: Dr. Hakki Candan Cankaya, Alcatel USA, hakki.cankaya@alcatel.com Dr. Surendar Chandra, Univ of Notre Dame, surendar@cse.nd.edu Workshops Co-Chairs: Dr. Nasir Ghani, Tennessee Tech University, nghani@ieee.org Dr. Rajeev Shorey, National University of Singapore, and IBM Research India, rajeev@comp.nus.edu.sg Exhibits and Sponsorships Chairs: Dr. Samrat Ganguly, NEC Labs, samrat@nec-labs.com Dr. Javier Aracil, Universidad Publica de Navarra, Spain, javier.aracil@unavarra.es Publicity Co-Chairs: Dr. Tim Ozugur, Alcatel USA, tim.ozugur@alcatel.com Dr. Gaoxi Xiao, Nanyang Technological Univ. Singapore, egxxiao@ntu.edu.sg Dr. Marcos Rogerio Salvador, CPqD Telecom & IT Solutions, marcosrs@cpqd.com.br Local Arrangements Chair: Dr. Subhankar Dhar, San Jose State University, dhar_s@cob.sjsu.edu Steering Committee Co-Chairs: Dr. Imrich Chlamtac, UT Dallas, chlamtac@utdallas.edu Dr. Krishna Sivalingam, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, krishna@umbc.edu ---------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 13:45:00 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA26096 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:45:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtACt-0007rf-V6 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:44:32 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HIiVqK030230 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:44:31 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtACt-0007rV-RN for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:44:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA26068 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:44:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtACr-0001lO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:44:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtABz-0001eM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:43:35 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtAB9-0001Xh-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:42:43 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtAAU-0007Se-A0; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:42:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtA9o-0007Gu-Ns for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:41:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25786 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:41:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtA9m-0001NK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:41:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtA8v-0001F7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:40:27 -0500 Received: from simon.cs.cornell.edu ([128.84.154.10]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtA7e-000100-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:39:06 -0500 Received: from sundial.cs.cornell.edu (sundial.cs.cornell.edu [128.84.96.115]) by simon.cs.cornell.edu (8.11.7-20031020/8.11.7/R-3.10) with ESMTP id i1HId6c19675 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:39:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from zinger.cs.cornell.edu (zinger.cs.cornell.edu [128.84.96.55]) by sundial.cs.cornell.edu (8.11.7-20031020/8.11.7/M-3.12a) with ESMTP id i1HId6B09928 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:39:06 -0500 (EST) Received: (from egs@localhost) by zinger.cs.cornell.edu (8.11.7-20031020/8.11.7/C-3.4) id i1HId5021310 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:39:05 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200402171839.i1HId5021310@zinger.cs.cornell.edu> To: manet@ietf.org Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:39:05 -0500 (EDT) From: "Emin Gun Sirer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] SNS release - Staged Network Simulator. Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, We are writing to announce the public release of SNS v0.1, a Staged Network Simulator, designed for efficient simulation of large-scale wireless networks. SNS derives its performance and scale through "staged simulation" [1,2]. Staged simulation is a new technique for reducing redundant computations commonly encountered in wireless network simulations. Simulations often exhibit redundancy, both within a single run as well as across a batch of runs with similar scenarios. The core behind staging is to compute expensive functions once, cache the results, and reuse them whenever possible. Since most computations in a traditional wireless simulator are directly or indirectly dependent on simulation time and provide little opportunity for reuse, staging proposes accuracy-preserving transformations to restructure the internal events in a simulator to break this dependency & expose and eliminate the redundant computations. These transformations include currying, incremental-computation, computing auxiliary results and time-shifting, and are documented in our papers. The end result is a simulator where basic, expensive operations, such as neighborhood computations, can be cached and reused without having to be computed from scratch. SNS is a branch off of the ns2 code base (version 2.1b9 with CMU Monarch extensions), where we replaced the guts of the simulator, including the event scheduler, to perform staging while we preserved the public ns2 interface. As a result, legacy code written for ns2 in C++ and Tcl continues to work on SNS, though faster and at higher scales. SNS can store the results of past computations on disk and reuse them across different runs of the simulator - a feature we found to be very useful when performing simulations in batches. Staging yields significant gains in both simulation performance and scale. Whereas stock ns2, under commonly-used ad hoc networking setups with N nodes, scales as O(N^2), SNS's execution time scales with O(N). On our test platform (1.8 GHz Intel Xeon with 6 GB RAM), this translates to a ~50-fold speedup for a 1500 node network, where the execution time improves from 32 hours to 37 minutes. SNS is free and can be downloaded from: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/People/egs/sns/ Hope this is a useful tool for your research. When referring to SNS, please cite our TOMACS paper instead of the earlier WSC paper. Gun & Kevin. -- [1] Kevin Walsh, Emin Gun Sirer. Staged Simulation: A General Technique for Improving Simulation Scale and Performance. To appear in ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), April 2004. [2] Kevin Walsh, Emin Gun Sirer. Staged Simulation for Improving the Scale and Performance of Wireless Network Simulations. In Procedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, New Orleans, LA, December 2003. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 13:54:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA26731 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtALw-0000Em-TT for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:53:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HIrqdV000909 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:53:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtALw-0000Ea-QY for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:53:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA26691 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:53:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtALu-0002an-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:53:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtAKs-0002Tp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:52:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtAKC-0002MI-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:52:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtAK9-0008Ez-DY; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:52:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtAJc-0008Dz-Cp for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:51:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA26503 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:51:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtAJa-0002JD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:51:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtAIe-0002E4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:50:29 -0500 Received: from [208.61.208.100] (helo=srv-exchange2.adtran.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtAIC-00029P-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:50:00 -0500 Received: by pobox.adtran.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:49:55 -0600 Message-ID: <39B01E2189D99F4B8C9612462DB3922A0CEBACF6@srv-exchange.adtran.com> From: DANIEL BYRNE To: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] MPR+DSDV Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:50:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Or packets can be chosen at random to follow one of the shortest paths. = It shouldn't matter how a packet gets to its destination; it only = matters if it gets there. There could be some advantage gained by = splitting the traffic up between the two shortest nodes. -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Richard Ogier Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 11:54 AM To: ines benbrahim Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPR+DSDV For the method described below to be correct, I need to make one = change. If there is more than one possible next hop on a shortest path to some destination, then the next hop with minimum (or maximum) node ID should be selected, so that routes are computed consistently by all nodes. (This is also why TBRPF uses node ID to break ties.) (The min node ID rule is only for deciding which destinations u to = report. Packets can be forwarded along any computed shortest path.) Richard -------- Original Message -------- I thought about combining MPRs with distance-vector routing (e.g., = DSDV) a few years ago, but I haven't seen it published anywhere. If MPRs are computed as in OLSR or TBRPF, then each node only needs to report the distances to a subset of destinations, i.e., to nodes u such that the next hop to u is an MPR selector. This is analogous to TBRPF in which each node reports only links on paths to a subset of destinations that is defined similarly. BTW, if this is a new idea and anyone uses it in a paper, please acknowledge this email. Richard Ogier SRI International ines benbrahim wrote: > hi every body > > i need your help, i am studying now the possibility of using MPR in=20 > DSDV protocol. can u help me to realize this implementation in = ns-2.26 > > thank u a lot > > =20 > > = ------------------------------------------------------------------------= > Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout = ! > Cr=E9ez votre Yahoo! Mail=20 > =20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 16:56:57 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA09493 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDCf-0003Tw-KP for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:29 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HLuTO4013383 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:29 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDCf-0003Tm-F7 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:29 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA09417 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDCd-0002Eq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDBZ-00023E-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:55:23 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDAR-0001pd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:54:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDAI-00035H-64; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:54:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtD9x-00034h-U7 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:53:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA09055 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:53:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtD9v-0001ky-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:53:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtD98-0001cY-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:52:50 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtD8E-0001Nw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:51:54 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (64.102.124.12) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2004 13:52:49 -0800 Received: from mchandra-u10.cisco.com (mchandra-u10.cisco.com [64.102.48.252]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i1HLpMT4004165; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:51:22 -0500 (EST) Received: (mchandra@localhost) by mchandra-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id i1HLpMW02070; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:51:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:51:22 -0500 From: "Madhavi W. Chandra" To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040217215122.GG1976@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Subject: [manet] Extensions to OSPF to Support MANETs Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi All, We recently posted a draft to the OSPF WG on extensions to OSPF to support mobile ad hoc networking. Discussions on the draft will be on the OSPF WG...so please post any comments there. Below is the link to the draft: http://www.riw.us/temp/draft-chandra-ospf-manet-00.txt Abstract: This document describes extensions to OSPF to support mobile ad hoc networking. Specifically, the document specifies a mechanism for link-local signaling, a OSPF-MANET interface, a simple technique to reduce the size of Hello packets by only transmitting incremental state changes, and a method for optimized flooding of routing updates. Thanks, Madhavi _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 17:13:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA11690 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:13:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDSr-0005mA-Di for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:13:13 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1HMDDUV022196 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:13:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDSr-0005lv-9D for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:13:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA11552 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:13:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDSo-0004kk-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:13:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDQq-0004PQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:11:09 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDPg-00044z-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:09:56 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AtDGZ-0000g7-VL for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:00:32 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDGB-0003nG-K9; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:00:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtDG1-0003io-7h for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:59:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA09966 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:59:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDFz-0002o7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:59:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDEx-0002cj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:58:51 -0500 Received: from itc100.adtran.com ([66.0.238.100] helo=srv-exchange1.adtran.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtDDo-0002Qd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:57:40 -0500 Received: by srv-exchange1.adtran.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <196WRX2Y>; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:57:29 -0600 Message-ID: <39B01E2189D99F4B8C9612462DB3922A0CEBACF7@srv-exchange.adtran.com> From: DANIEL BYRNE To: "'Madhavi W. Chandra'" , manet@ietf.org Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:57:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [manet] LUNAR Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Anyone here testing with LUNAR. Can anyone here testify to its performance vs other AhHoc Routing protocols? _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 19:05:59 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA18192 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:05:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFDa-0005Ux-6z for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:05:34 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1I05YHc021132 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:05:34 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFDa-0005Ul-13 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:05:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA18184 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:05:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFDW-0004uj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:05:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFCd-0004qb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:04:36 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFCE-0004mU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:04:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFC5-0005C1-MW; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:04:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFBU-00059e-BW for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:03:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA18075 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:03:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFBR-0004k8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:03:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFAS-0004gC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:02:21 -0500 Received: from fw.flarion.com ([63.103.94.24] helo=ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtF9V-0004Zr-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:01:21 -0500 content-class: urn:content-classes:message Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:00:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Thread-Topic: Agenda Item Request Thread-Index: AcP1skJtyUMM4z3DQqK/pedd4wDQZA== From: "Corson Scott" To: Cc: "Joe Macker" , "Alex Zinin" , "Bill Fenner" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] Agenda Item Request Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Folks, Anyone interested in presenting at the upcoming mtg in Seoul please send = your request to Joe or myself. We'll forward the agenda to the = yet-to-be-decided chair of that session. Thx, -Scott _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 19:30:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA18979 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:30:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFap-0008Md-Mf for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:29:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1I0TZlE032145 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:29:35 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFap-0008MO-Ik for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:29:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA18969 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:29:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFan-0006XS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:29:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFZs-0006Sn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:28:37 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFZP-0006Ox-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:28:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFZJ-0007mp-Lm; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFYl-0007Zg-KU for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:27:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA18933 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:27:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFYk-0006M3-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:27:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFXr-0006JE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:26:31 -0500 Received: from mx.laposte.net ([81.255.54.11]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFX5-0006Ck-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:25:43 -0500 Received: from loria.fr (82.67.42.119) by mx.laposte.net (7.0.024) (authenticated as fleury.fleury) id 4031463B00062451 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 01:25:12 +0100 Message-ID: <4032B0DC.2090907@loria.fr> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 01:25:00 +0100 From: Eric Fleury User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Re: MPRF Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, We have some comments on the MPRF draft proposal that you have submitted on the MANet mailing list. We do believe that MPRF is a great initiative and that MPRF can be useful for all ad hoc protocols (of course for both proactive and reactive routing protocols but also for service location, multicast...). We are currently using such a concept of MPRF in order to design and implement simple multicast routing protocol [DMZ]. Thus we are really interested by having a strong MPRF proposal inside the MANet group. As mentioned by Richard Ogier, we also noticed that because MPRs are source oriented, they may present a lack of robustness as opposed to independent MPRs. Since we have several additional comments I will take your bullet list point by point. The first point that we want to make is that regarding IPv6, we did propose a draft ana6 [ANA6] in order to support IPv6 ad hoc architecture. The aim of this draft was not to propose yet another routing protocol nor to implement a specific protocol but its fundamental aim was to allow IPv6 ad hoc networks at the IP level, based on the MANET RFC 2501, ``a MANet node principally consists of a router, which may be physically attached to multiple IP hosts (or IP-addressable devices), which has potentially *multiple* wireless interfaces--each interface using a *different* wireless technology''. In the eyes of your draft it appears that our ana6 proposal may help the implementation and the specification of "flooding like techniques". In ana6, we introduce a new type of IPv6 local-use unicast address: namely *ad hoc-local addresses*. The validity of an ad hoc-local address is limited to an ad hoc network. We define an ad hoc network as a maximal connected set of ad hoc interfaces. Note that this definition allows no controversy about ad hoc networks boundaries, as opposed to the tricky problem of defining a site frontier which will probably be responsible for the deprecation of site-local addresses. Ana6 also defines the notion of connector. The connector is the basic addressable object in the ad hoc network. It virtualizes several network interfaces (the interfaces involved in the ad hoc network) into as ingle addressable object. A connector is associated to a set of IPv6 addresses (1 ad hoc local and 0+ global). Each interface bound to a connector (or involved in the ad hoc network) uses and recognizes the IPv6 addresses associated to the connector. In consequence, it becomes really straight-forward to perform ad hoc routing over multiple interfaces/multiple physical networks as an ad hoc node is addressed regardless the interface it is joined by. Another feature provided by connectors is that it becomes possible to perform interface mobility/switching (vertical handoff) without any change in the IP addresses used as the same ad hoc addresses are recognized by all ad hoc interfaces. Within such architecture, it becomes more easier to : > - Works in networks that contain nodes that are not MPRF-aware A node should be by default a MPR and thus perform a "classical" flooding. Intelligent MPRF selection will be there only to thin the number of MPRs and thus to perform more efficient. Doing pure flooding as a default MPRF mode is easy in ana6. > - Fits well within IP, allowing forwarding for TTL>1 > without requiring application processing Ana6 defines IPv6 ad hoc multicast addresses and an ad hoc multicast scope. Within such a scope, only adhoc nodes receive multicast data and the routing is performed strictly at the IP level without any "application" consideration. We aim at offering full classic IP services and the notion of multi-link subnet is used and allows to share a unique (or several in an advanced use) IP subnet map over severals links. This means that there is no addressing changes from one link to another, all of them being in the same IP subnet. However, since the packet crosses several links during its journey, the routing is still performed at the IP layer. > - Allows layer-2 broadcast (instead of iterated > unicast tunneling) when possible The introduction of an ad hoc multicast scope by ana6 enables multicast at level 3. It is not necessary any more to perform level 2 broadcast as the ad hoc network is seen and handled as a multi-link subnet. > - Works for all upper layer protocols without > requiring IP to make decisions based on the > payload. As mentioned above, the introduction of ad hoc multicast addresses does not impact on upper layers and applications can still use of course global IPv6 addresses if the ad hoc network is connected to the Internet. > 2.4 : Unique Identifier Destination Option I think that in IPv6 all ad hoc multicast packets must have an UID implemented as an IPv6 option as you mentioned in your draft. Many IPv6 multicast packets (e.g., Router Advertisements) are similar and it is necessary to add such an option as we can not decide wether such a packet has already been received or wether it is a new but similar one. Guillaume Chelius & Eric Fleury INRIA - ARES PS: Note that for IPv4, we also proposed in the past a level 2.5 approach that offers all IP functionalities described in ana6 (one IP address for all ad hoc interfaces, level 2 broadcast, TTL> 1... ) but unfortunately not at the IP level which appeared to be not really *political correct* inside the MANet group (-; [DMZ] G. CHELIUS, E. FLEURY, AND F. VALLOIS, Adaptive and robust adhoc multicast structure, in 14th IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communication (PIMRC 2003), Beijing, China, September 2003, IEEE. [ANA6] G. CHELIUS AND E. FLEURY, Ipv6 addressing architecture support for ad hoc, Internet Draft draftchelius- adhoc-ipv6-archi-00.txt, Internet Engineering Task Force, August 2002. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 19:40:57 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19441 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFlI-0001MO-PR for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:28 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1I0eOik005227 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFlI-0001ME-4w for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19342 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFlG-0007U1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFkH-0007L1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:39:22 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFjJ-0007Cm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:38:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFj0-0000Vr-6w; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:38:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFiZ-0000MM-HE for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:37:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19228 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:37:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFiX-0007Aa-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:37:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFhf-000771-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:36:40 -0500 Received: from cms4.etri.re.kr ([129.254.16.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFgy-0006yZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:35:56 -0500 Received: from jafywinxp (pd412h.etri.re.kr [129.254.112.174]) by cms4.etri.re.kr with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id 1Y1YVVRH; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:36:01 +0900 Reply-To: From: "HyunWook Cha" To: "'manet'" Cc: "autonet" Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:33:18 +0900 Message-ID: <07d701c3f5b6$cdef9770$ae70fe81@jafywinxp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, folks. Recently I posted new I-D related to Internet connectivity for MANETs. Welcome anyone's comments who are insterested in this issue. If this issue is still within scope of the MANET wg, I would like to present my I-D at Seoul meeting. Thanks, HyunWook Cha -----Original Message----- From: owner-ietf-announce@ietf.org [mailto:owner-ietf-announce@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 5:51 AM To: IETF-Announce: Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Support of Internet Connectivity for AODV Author(s) : H. Cha Filename : draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt Pages : 0 Date : 2004-2-11 In this document, we propose another solution to support Internet connectivity for AODV. In the design of our solution, several important limits of existing solutions are considered. Especially, new route determination and forwarding algorithms are proposed. Proposed route determination algorithm supports dynamic switching between default route and host route in a sender node through which enhanced performance can be achieved under frequent topological changes. And proposed forwarding algorithm supports next hop forwarding for default routes towards multiple gateways. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 19:42:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19625 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:42:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFmx-0001Rp-2d for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:42:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1I0g7SM005559 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:42:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFmw-0001Ra-Ve for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:42:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19535 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:42:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFmv-0007kV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:42:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFlz-0007bA-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:41:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFl2-0007Rv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFky-00014c-Kc; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:40:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtFkK-00010k-RL for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:39:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19275 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:39:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFkJ-0007L9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:39:23 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFjK-0007E2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:38:22 -0500 Received: from pec.etri.re.kr ([129.254.114.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtFiP-00077b-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:37:25 -0500 Received: from paulnb (paul3.etri.re.kr [129.254.112.196]) by pec.etri.re.kr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1I0r8fM004565; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:53:08 +0900 (KST) Message-ID: <001101c3f5b7$22a45080$c470fe81@etri.re.kr> From: "Jaehoon Paul Jeong" To: "Corson Scott" Cc: "MANET WG" , "autonet" References: Subject: Re: [manet] Agenda Item Request Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:35:39 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=MIME_BASE64_LATIN, MIME_BASE64_TEXT autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 RGVhciBDb3Jzb24sDQoNCkkgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0byBwcmVzZW50IGEgdGFsayBhYm91dCAiUmVx dWlyZW1lbnRzIGFuZCBNZWNoYW5pc21zIGZvciBNQU5FVCBBZGRyZXNzIEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0 aW9uIg0KaW4gMTAgbWludXRlczsNClRoaXMgdGFsayB3aWxsIGNvbnNpc3Qgb2YgdGhyZWUgZHJh ZnRzIGFzIGZvbGxvd3M7DQoNCjEuIFJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBmb3IgQWQgSG9jIElQIEFkZHJlc3Mg QXV0b2NvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24gDQogICAgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFm dHMvZHJhZnQtamVvbmctbWFuZXQtYWRkci1hdXRvY29uZi1yZXF0cy0wMS50eHQNCg0KMi4gQWQg SG9jIElQIEFkZHJlc3MgQXV0b2NvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24NCiAgICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3Jn L2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0cy9kcmFmdC1qZW9uZy1hZGhvYy1pcC1hZGRyLWF1dG9jb25mLTAyLnR4 dA0KDQozLiBBZCBIb2MgSVAgQWRkcmVzcyBBdXRvY29uZmlndXJhdGlvbiBmb3IgQU9EVg0KICAg IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzL2RyYWZ0LWplb25nLW1hbmV0LWFv ZHYtYWRkci1hdXRvY29uZi0wMC50eHQNCg0KV2UgaG9wZSB0aGF0IG91ciB3b3JrIHdpbGwgYmUg b25lIG9mIE1BTkVUIG5leHQgd29ya3MuDQpUaGFua3MuDQoNClJlZ2FyZHMsDQpKYWVob29uIFBh dWwgSmVvbmcNCg0KLS0tLS0gT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZSAtLS0tLSANCkZyb206ICJDb3Jzb24g U2NvdHQiIDxDb3Jzb25AZmxhcmlvbi5jb20+DQpUbzogPG1hbmV0QGlldGYub3JnPg0KQ2M6ICJK b2UgTWFja2VyIiA8bWFja2VyQGl0ZC5ucmwubmF2eS5taWw+OyAiQWxleCBaaW5pbiIgPHppbmlu QHBzZy5jb20+OyAiQmlsbCBGZW5uZXIiIDxmZW5uZXJAcmVzZWFyY2guYXR0LmNvbT4NClNlbnQ6 IFdlZG5lc2RheSwgRmVicnVhcnkgMTgsIDIwMDQgOTowMCBBTQ0KU3ViamVjdDogW21hbmV0XSBB Z2VuZGEgSXRlbSBSZXF1ZXN0DQoNCg0KDQpGb2xrcywNCg0KQW55b25lIGludGVyZXN0ZWQgaW4g cHJlc2VudGluZyBhdCB0aGUgdXBjb21pbmcgbXRnIGluIFNlb3VsIHBsZWFzZSBzZW5kIHlvdXIN CnJlcXVlc3QgdG8gSm9lIG9yIG15c2VsZi4gIFdlJ2xsIGZvcndhcmQgdGhlIGFnZW5kYSB0byB0 aGUgeWV0LXRvLWJlLWRlY2lkZWQNCmNoYWlyIG9mIHRoYXQgc2Vzc2lvbi4NCg0KVGh4LA0KDQot U2NvdHQNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18N Cm1hbmV0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KbWFuZXRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3MS5pZXRmLm9y Zy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL21hbmV0DQo= _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 17 20:27:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA21568 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:27:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtGTy-0004kg-E2 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:26:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1I1QYeC018265 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:26:34 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtGTx-0004kW-3k for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:26:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA21565 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:26:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtGTu-0003Qf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:26:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtGSy-0003NV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:25:33 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtGSk-0003KY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:25:18 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtGSU-0004UX-Rx; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:25:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtGRy-0004Tk-3F for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:24:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA21509 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:24:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtGRv-0003JV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:24:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtGQy-0003Gb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:23:29 -0500 Received: from note.orchestra.cse.unsw.edu.au ([129.94.242.24] ident=root) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtGQT-0003E4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:22:57 -0500 Received: From 192.168.0.101 ([129.94.173.78] == sitcrc.cse.unsw.EDU.AU) (for ) (for ) (for ) (for ) By note With Smtp ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:22:00 +1100 From: Justin Lipman To: "Charles E. Perkins" Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:21:59 +1100 Reply-To: justin@titr.uow.edu.au Organization: CRC-SIT Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> Cc: Joe Macker , Richard Ogier , Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402181221.59578.justin@titr.uow.edu.au> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Charles et al, I published a small paper in ICON 2003 which describes Utility Based Flooding (UBF) - a more generic approach to selecting MPRs, based soley upon forwarding utilities. http://www.titr.uow.edu.au/~justin/raid_icon03.pdf I also have a version, not yet published, which allows nodes to be self selecting (in terms of MPR status) during a flood given minimal prior broadcast information. Both approaches have equivalent performance to MPR. However the biggest difference is that UBF is "Resource Aware"! Thus UBF is able to account for a node's battery power or even user based constraints. I think this is really very important in ad hoc network environments that consist of heterogenous nodes and definitely useful in reactive protocols for route discovery. kind regards, Justin Ps. Below is a short description of UBF. Sorry for the latex... \cite{LBCJ1} describe a distributed optimised broadcasting mechanism for ad hoc networks called Utility Based Flooding (UBF). UBF unlike existing optimised broadcasting mechanisms is fully resource aware. UBF selects relays based solely upon a forwarding utility ($U_f = BU_pU_n$). The utility $U_p=1/1+e^{-P+s}$ is a sigmoid function where $P$ is the remaining energy at a node while $s=MaxEnergy/2$ is half the maximal energy. $U_n$ is the ratio of unallocated (uncovered) local two hop neighbours and the total number of two hop neighbours. The significant point in UBF, is that the selection of nodes with unique neighbours is not a priority as in MPR. In this way the coverage provided by those best nodes (in terms of resources) is accounted for irrespective of unique neighbours as is done in MPR. $U_n$ increases the utility of possible relays that may have unique neighbours. However, if a node with a unique neighbour is not suitable because of constraints or low resources, then its utility will remain low such that it may only be selected after all other possible relays are selected. The benevolence ($B$) is used to represent any constraints imposed upon a device. A user may allow a device attached to a reliable power source to fully participate in network activities. However, if the device is mobile and the battery power drops below a specified limit, the user may not wish the device to participate. Existing broadcasting mechanisms do not account for this type of behaviour. Thus their performance will be degraded in such a network as they may select restricted nodes as relays which will not rebroadcast messages. UBF is compared, through simulation, to existing flooding mechanisms in a constrained environment. Nodes are assigned varying degrees of remaining battery power and user based constraints that limit a nodes benevolence based upon its remaining battery power. UBF is shown to: significantly improve broadcast reachability over successive broadcasts, not adversely affect performance and extend the lifetime of both nodes participating in the ad hoc network and the network itself. On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 06:24 am, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > Hello folks, > > After a long gestation, an initial revision of our > proposal for more scalable flooding has finally made > it into the Internet Drafts directory. > > MPRF ("Multi-point Relay Flooding") has the following > goals: > - Scalable flooding > - Intended to work with AODV, OLSR, DSR, and TBRPF > albeit with perhaps some minor modifications > - Works in networks that contain nodes that are not > MPRF-aware > - Fits well within IP, allowing forwarding for TTL>1 > without requiring application processing > - Allows layer-2 broadcast (instead of iterated > unicast tunneling) when possible > - Allows for parametrizable redundant coverage > to help overcome the deficiencies of unreliable > broadcast > - Works for all upper layer protocols without > requiring IP to make decisions based on the > payload. > > It is the authors' intention that even this fairly > rough initial draft may help to ease future protocol > convergence within [manet]. > > A significant difficulty with the current algorithm > is that a node may be a MPR for some of its neighbors > but not for other neighbors. It would greatly > simplify the algorithm if we could identify a > useful mechanism by which a node is either a MPR > or not, and all of its neighbors would agree on > that status. If that happens, then there will no > longer be a need for the MPR node to determine which > of its neighbors transmitted the flooded packet. > As it is, we need this determination. When the > identification cannot be made by inspecting the > source address in the MAC header, the flooded > packet has to be tunneled. > > Comments will, as always, be appreciated. If it > is found to be useful, we would like to see this > protocol document be considered as a working group > draft. > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet -- Research Associate Smart Internet Technology Cooperative Research Centre http://www.titr.uow.edu.au/~justin _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 18 00:55:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA00370 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:55:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtKfP-0006FM-Tq for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:54:40 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1I5sdMG024008 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:54:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtKfP-0006F9-PN for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:54:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA00362 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:54:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtKfN-0004n5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:54:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtKeX-0004jy-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:53:46 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtKe0-0004go-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:53:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtKdq-0005yD-C4; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:53:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtKdT-0005vT-SZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:52:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA00284 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:52:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtKdR-0004fS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:52:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtKcT-0004cD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:51:38 -0500 Received: from albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.120]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtKbj-0004ZR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:50:51 -0500 Received: from user-2ivfmrc.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.219.108] helo=erg.sri.com) by albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AtKbi-0000vV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:50:50 -0800 Message-ID: <4032FD31.8050308@erg.sri.com> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:50:41 -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: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] [Fwd: Re: Extensions to OSPF to Support Mobile Ad Hoc Networking] Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am posting the following message to the OSPF and MANET mailing lists. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Extensions to OSPF to Support Mobile Ad Hoc Networking Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:39:57 -0800 From: Richard Ogier Reply-To: Mailing List To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM References: Russ and all, I have some comments on the document http://www.riw.us/temp/draft-chandra-ospf-manet-00.txt I like the use of incremental (or differential) Hellos. TBRPF also uses differential Hellos to reduce overhead, and avoids having to report all neighbors periodically in Hellos. (As far as I know TBRPF is the first MANET protocol that has Hellos with this property.) I also like your use of the sequence number (SCS) that is incremented only when the neighbor set changes. This is probably an improvement over the Hello sequence number of TBRPF, which is incremented with each Hello. However, one advantage of TBRPF Hellos is that a 1-way neighbor is not included indefinitely in Hellos. (A MANET node can have a large number of 1-way neighbors that never become 2-way.) However, it should be easy to modify your protocol so that 1-way neighbors are included in Hellos for only a short time. I also like the fact that 2-hop neighbor information is learned via LSAs and not Hellos. This has been a point of argument between TBRPF and OLSR for years. (In OLSR, nodes learn 2-hop neighbor information via Hellos, and in TBRPF this is learned via topology updates.) I like the technique in which each node only needs to ACK each LSA instance once (even if it is received from multiple neighbors). However, this can still result in a lot of overhead when topology changes are frequent. In draft-ogier-manet-ospf-extension-00.txt, I discuss two promising alternatives to ACKs, which I summarize below. The first idea is to identify LSAs that change frequently, by maintaining an exponential moving average of the time between successive updates of each LSA. The originator can identify (via an option bit) such frequently changing LSAs as "non-ackable". (This is slightly different from my draft.) Non-ackable LSAs are retransmitted periodically (e.g., every 5 seconds) and thus need not be ACKed, thereby reducing overhead significantly. The second idea in my draft is inspired by the Complete Sequence Numbers messages of IS-IS. Each node (or as proposed in my draft, each CDS node) periodically broadcasts to all neighbors a complete set of Database Description packets. If a node receives such a DD packet from a neighbor that indicates the neighbor has a more recent instance of some LSAs, the node unicasts a LS Request packet to the neighbor, to request the newer information. INRIA has put out a new draft (draft-clausen-manet-ospf-dbx-00.txt) which presents a variation of this idea that uses a more compact representation for the Database Description messages. My objective was to use the OSPF DD and LS Request packets with little or no modification, but it will be interesting to see if the more compact representation of INRIA reduces overhead sufficiently to justify the new message types. Finally, it appears that you require the formation of full adjacencies between all pairs of neighbors, which I think is very inefficient. That's like requiring that adjacencies be formed between all pairs of nodes in an OSPF broadcast network (instead of just between the DR and Backup DR and their neighbors). As discussed in my draft, adjacencies only need to be formed between CDS nodes and their neighbors. (A CDS node is a natural generalization of a DR.) My draft also discusses ways to reduce overhead with MPRs, e.g., by having each MPR report only a subset of the LSAs in its database. (It may also be possible to apply this latter idea to reduce the overhead of the method described in INRIA's new draft.) Richard _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 18 12:18:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29920 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:18:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtVL1-0007IW-Mc for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:18:19 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1IHIJ36028046 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:18:19 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtVL1-0007IH-Hj for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:18:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29888 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:18:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtVL0-0005Fr-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:18:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtVJs-00057d-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:17:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtVJ0-0004zZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:16:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtVIn-0006cG-Jl; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:16:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtVHy-0006aq-KZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:15:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29639 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:15:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtVHx-0004rZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:15:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtVGw-0004o6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:14:06 -0500 Received: from balu1.urz.unibas.ch ([131.152.1.51]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtVGg-0004kU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:13:50 -0500 Received: from lunar.cs.unibas.ch (lunar.cs.unibas.ch [131.152.55.196]) by balu1.urz.unibas.ch (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1IHDInE003711 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:13:19 +0100 From: Evgeny Osipov To: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE:[manet] LUNAR Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:12:07 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402181812.07653.Evgeny.Osipov@unibas.ch> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, We are currently finalizing the NS version of Lunar, with plans to open it for public use in couple of weeks. The announcement will be sent to the MANET list. We are currently extensively testing Lunar against AODV (original and Uppsala implementations). The results so far show equal effect of both protocols on tcp throughput for example, however the total overhead of routing data in the network is less for Lunar. We were able as well to identify the scenarios where Lunar performs better than AODV. In the nearest plans is to compare Lunar with OLSR. We would be glad to share our findings after the release of Lunar-ns, and certainly interested in maintaining the discussion. Evgeny -- Evgeny Osipov, Tekn.Lic. Visiting researcher University of Basel, Switzerland email: Evgeny.Osipov@unibas.ch Tel.: +41 61 267 05 58 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 18 16:03:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20515 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:03:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtYqU-00049f-21 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:03:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1IL326p015971 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:03:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtYqT-00049T-PH for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:03:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20486 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:02:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtYqS-0007MR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:03:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtYpX-0007Gj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:02:03 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtYoi-0007Bd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:01:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtYoZ-0003mJ-Lz; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:01:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtYoB-0003kg-5T for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:00:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20337 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:00:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtYo9-00079z-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:00:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtYni-00077t-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:00:10 -0500 Received: from ux5.cso.uiuc.edu ([128.174.5.45] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtYmz-000760-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:59:25 -0500 Received: from csmincao (csl-mincao.csl.uiuc.edu [130.126.136.213]) by ux5.cso.uiuc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1IKxPt9018499 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:59:25 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <001501c3f662$17b32470$61affea9@ad.uiuc.edu> From: "Min Cao" To: Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:59:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C3F62F.CB3D8BD0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: [manet] 802.11 PHY design Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE, HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C3F62F.CB3D8BD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi there, Does anyone by any chance know that if there is some good material that = gives detailed description of the design choices of IEEE802.11 PHY = layer? I would like to know how they would estimate the SINR at the = receiver under the protocol coordination and how they determine the rate = (say 11Mbps chip rate in DSSS) according to some error rate assumptions? = Thanks, Min Cao ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C3F62F.CB3D8BD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi there,
 
Does anyone by any=20 chance know that if there is some good material = that=20 gives detailed description of the design choices of IEEE802.11 = PHY=20 layer? I would like to know how they would estimate the SINR = at the=20 receiver under the protocol coordination and how they determine=20 the rate (say 11Mbps chip rate in DSSS) according to = some error=20 rate assumptions? 
 
Thanks,
Min=20 Cao   
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C3F62F.CB3D8BD0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 01:22:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16276 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:22:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AthZQ-0001oD-Bs for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:22:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1J6M02N006949 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:22:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AthZQ-0001o0-49 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:22:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16257 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:21:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AthZN-0005rT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:21:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AthYS-0005oG-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:21:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AthXh-0005lZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:20:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AthXY-0001UH-38; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:20:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AthWb-0001Qt-KN for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:19:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16171 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:19:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AthWY-0005ho-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:19:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AthVa-0005eg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:18:03 -0500 Received: from bay12-f64.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.64] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AthUx-0005YS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:17:23 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 22:16:53 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:16:52 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:46:52 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Feb 2004 06:16:53.0050 (UTC) FILETIME=[F79D59A0:01C3F6AF] Subject: [manet] Size of TORA Traces Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello Everybody, please anybody tell me that on simulating TORA on ns2 simulator in an environment of size 1000 X 1000 with 50 nodes, cbr traffic and nodes moving at rate of 200m/s for 300 sec. the size of trace is more than 200MB. i dont know whether the trace is correct or not because i am not able to read the whole trace. please tell me does the size of trace is expected. if its right then i will move forward for analysis. ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Raja Ravi Varma paintings. Buy art prints. http://go.msnserver.com/IN/42737.asp At MSN Shopping. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 05:44:43 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA13222 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:44:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtlfD-00060A-F6 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:44:16 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1JAiF9s023064 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:44:15 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtlfD-0005zv-B4 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:44:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA13195 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:44:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Atlf9-0004p8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:44:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Atle7-0004jb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:43:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtldB-0004fD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:42:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Atld3-0005eg-Hk; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:42:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Atlc8-0005dO-Jx for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:41:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA13114 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:41:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Atlc5-0004Zv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:41:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Atlb7-0004WZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:40:02 -0500 Received: from rodin.i2r.a-star.edu.sg ([192.122.139.27] helo=i2r.a-star.edu.sg) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtlaA-0004R8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:39:02 -0500 Received: from newmailhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by i2r.a-star.edu.sg (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1JAcS7o004659 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:38:28 +0800 (SGT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([192.168.152.135]) by mailhost.lit.org.sg (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 1 (built Aug 19 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HTB00AU7UWCS0@mailhost.lit.org.sg> for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:38:37 +0800 (SGT) Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BC3802F88D; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:38:55 +0800 (SGT) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:38:55 +0800 From: "Sukanta K. Hazra" Subject: Re: [manet] Size of TORA Traces In-reply-to: To: Karun Verma Cc: manet@ietf.org Mail-followup-to: Karun Verma , manet@ietf.org Message-id: <20040219103855.GA20460@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> Organization: Institute for Infocomm Research MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline PGP-ID: 0x8E084AD5 Key-Fingerprint: 9C0D B00C C62A 7059 5314 99FC CE90 478A 8E08 4AD5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hi Karun, Not entirely sure but its possible that the high speed 200m/s results in a large number of node position updates, and the corresponding large size of the traces. Are you using trace-all? Regards, Sukanta ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karun Verma " Date: Thu, 19 Feb, 2004 14:16 SGT Subject: [manet] Size of TORA Traces > > Hello Everybody, > > > > please anybody tell me that on simulating TORA on ns2 simulator in an > environment of size 1000 X 1000 with 50 nodes, cbr traffic and nodes moving > at rate of 200m/s for 300 sec. the size of trace is more than 200MB. i dont > know whether the trace is correct or not because i am not able to read the > whole trace. please tell me does the size of trace is expected. if its > right then i will move forward for analysis. > > > ############################################ > > # Karun Verma > # > > ########################################### > > _________________________________________________________________ > Raja Ravi Varma paintings. Buy art prints. > http://go.msnserver.com/IN/42737.asp At MSN Shopping. > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet -- Sukanta K. Hazra (Mr.) Institute for Infocomm Research Tel: +65 6874-1953 Fax: +65 6776-8109 Homepage: http://www1.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/~sukanta/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 06:28:52 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA14625 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:28:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtmLx-0001Ik-Vj for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:28:26 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1JBSP8E004996 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:28:25 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtmLx-0001IV-RK for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:28:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA14585 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:28:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtmLt-00072n-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:28:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtmKz-0006yL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:27:26 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtmJy-0006uB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:26:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtmJe-0000a7-WD; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:26:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtmIj-0000Ym-4f for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:25:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA14495 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:25:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtmIf-0006pp-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:25:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtmHl-0006nV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:24:06 -0500 Received: from web8301.mail.in.yahoo.com ([203.199.122.31]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtmGs-0006iv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:23:10 -0500 Message-ID: <20040219112240.6973.qmail@web8301.mail.in.yahoo.com> Received: from [202.141.69.85] by web8301.mail.in.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:22:40 GMT Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:22:40 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Ash=20Mohammad=20Abbas?= Subject: Re: [manet] Size of TORA Traces To: "Sukanta K. Hazra" , Karun Verma Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040219103855.GA20460@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, FROM_HAS_ULINE_NUMS,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Its too high speed. In general a speed of around 10m/s or even less might suffice. Abbas --- "Sukanta K. Hazra" wrote: > Hi Karun, > > Not entirely sure but its possible that the high > speed 200m/s > results in a large number of node position updates, > and the > corresponding large size of the traces. Are you > using trace-all? > > Regards, > Sukanta > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Karun Verma " > Date: Thu, 19 Feb, 2004 14:16 SGT > Subject: [manet] Size of TORA Traces > > > > > Hello Everybody, > > > > > > > > please anybody tell me that on simulating TORA on > ns2 simulator in an > > environment of size 1000 X 1000 with 50 nodes, cbr > traffic and nodes moving > > at rate of 200m/s for 300 sec. the size of trace > is more than 200MB. i dont > > know whether the trace is correct or not because i > am not able to read the > > whole trace. please tell me does the size of trace > is expected. if its > > right then i will move forward for analysis. > > > > > > ############################################ > > > > # Karun Verma > > > # > > > > ########################################### > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Raja Ravi Varma paintings. Buy art prints. > > http://go.msnserver.com/IN/42737.asp At MSN > Shopping. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > -- > Sukanta K. Hazra (Mr.) > Institute for Infocomm Research > Tel: +65 6874-1953 Fax: +65 6776-8109 > Homepage: http://www1.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/~sukanta/ > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ===== Ash Mohammad Abbashttp://www.cse.iitd.ernet.in/~abbas ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Insurance Special: Be informed on the best policies, services, tools and more. Go to: http://in.insurance.yahoo.com/licspecial/index.html _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 10:45:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23976 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:45:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqMR-0006zH-LC for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:45:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1JFjBbJ026858 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:45:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqMR-0006z7-Hk for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:45:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23928 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:45:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqMP-0003Uf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:45:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqLQ-0003QC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:44:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqKW-0003NF-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:43:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqKM-0006ef-7p; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:43:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqJd-0006aq-MT for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:42:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23828 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:42:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqJb-0003JW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:42:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqIe-0003FC-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:41:16 -0500 Received: from davinci.coe.neu.edu ([129.10.32.95]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqHp-0003B2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:40:25 -0500 Received: from Wright.coe.neu.edu (Wright.coe.neu.edu [129.10.32.88]) by DaVinci.coe.neu.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1JFeFrN016730 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:40:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from 00065B2F3DE2 [129.10.65.93]) by Wright.coe.neu.edu (SAVSMTP 3.1.0.29) with SMTP id M2004021910401322000 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:40:13 -0500 Message-ID: <0a7f01c3f6fe$a73f1080$5d410a81@00065B2F3DE2> From: "Z. Maria Wang" To: Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:40:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C3F6D4.BE553260" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: [manet] Traffic Mode/Model of Ad Hoc Sensor Networks Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C3F6D4.BE553260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear All, Would anybody suggest a well-established or well-applied traffic model = for wireless ad hoc sensor network? Someone used uniform distribution = for each node. I personally do not incline to it.=20 Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot, Zheng Maria Wang ------=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C3F6D4.BE553260 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear All,
 
Would anybody suggest a = well-established or=20 well-applied traffic model for wireless ad hoc sensor network? Someone = used=20 uniform distribution for each node. I personally do not incline to = it.=20
Any advice will be greatly=20 appreciated.
 
Thanks a lot,
 
Zheng Maria = Wang
------=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C3F6D4.BE553260-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 10:55:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24646 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:55:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqWF-0000Oq-G7 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:55:19 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1JFtJos001530 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:55:19 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqWF-0000Ob-BW for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:55:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24588 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:55:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqWC-0004Kf-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:55:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqVF-0004Fj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:54:18 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqUN-0004BL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:53:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqU2-0008B2-LU; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:53:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtqTD-0007xl-Ph for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:52:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24382 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:52:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqTB-00044X-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:52:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqSC-00040H-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:51:09 -0500 Received: from 66-152-29-4.ded.btitelecom.net ([66.152.29.4] helo=mail.scires.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtqRE-0003uG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:50:08 -0500 Received: from SRCATL-MTA by mail.scires.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:47:36 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.3 Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:47:15 -0500 From: "Andreas Yankopolus" To: Subject: Re: [manet] Traffic Mode/Model of Ad Hoc Sensor Networks Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Would anybody suggest a well-established or well-applied traffic model > for wireless ad hoc sensor network? Someone used uniform distribution > for each node. I personally do not incline to it.=20 > Any advice will be greatly appreciated. The traffic model would depend on the type of sensing you're doing. The = traffic flowing in a sensor network consisting of personnel/vehicular = sensors would differ greatly from using chem/bio sensors. In either case, = you'd need models of your sensors' sensitivities to the stimuli they're = designed to sense. In the former case, you'd also need to model the = movement of personnel and vehicles through the sensor network. In the = latter, you'd need a dispersion model for the chem/bio agent. Cheers, Andreas _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 12:00:00 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26817 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:59:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtrWN-0007lU-4B for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:59:32 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1JGxVJU029849 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:59:31 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtrWM-0007lM-Vh for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:59:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26813 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:59:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtrWL-00007S-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:59:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtrVO-00002l-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:58:31 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtrUw-0007ma-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:58:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtrTy-0007J9-1T; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtrTI-0007In-2n for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:56:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26735 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:56:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtrTG-0007jB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:56:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtrSL-0007gu-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:55:21 -0500 Received: from ellis.ad.nps.navy.mil ([131.120.18.61]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AtrS6-0007eI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:55:06 -0500 Received: from [131.120.179.249] ([131.120.179.249]) by ellis.ad.nps.navy.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:55:04 -0800 Subject: Re: [manet] Traffic Mode/Model of Ad Hoc Sensor Networks From: Rex Buddenberg To: "Z. Maria Wang" Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <0a7f01c3f6fe$a73f1080$5d410a81@00065B2F3DE2> References: <0a7f01c3f6fe$a73f1080$5d410a81@00065B2F3DE2> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1077209704.1457.10.camel@ro179-18.ro.nps.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 19 Feb 2004 08:55:04 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Feb 2004 16:55:04.0297 (UTC) FILETIME=[1EF9F590:01C3F709] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Highly dependent on the sensor and it's application, would seem to me. Here's one example: Consider a laydown of sensors doing, say, sniffing for chem/bio agents. (The specific environment -- whether military formation force protection or a city's civil defense, is not terribly relevant). Each of these sensors is implemented as a toaster -- has a net interface, packages it's messages in e-mail and has an SNMP agent in it. Some sensors would be fixed, others mobile. The fixed sensors would likely not be on a MANET segment but the mobile ones could be. The character of the traffic would probably be of two flavors: - a fairly steady, but low, stream of SNMP 'are you ok' type of messages day in, day out. In real world, this accounting might be done at night, non-peak. Most of it would be SNMP get messages so the monitor controls the schedule. - 'I smell something' messages which are likely not to occur at all until something bad happens (disregarding false alarms). Then you get a big spike. In the first case, the distribution might be uniform but there are some good reasons why you might not want it to be ... and you can control that. In the second case, the distribution will be anything but uniform -- you'd get an unheralded spike. On Thu, 2004-02-19 at 07:40, Z. Maria Wang wrote: > Dear All, > > Would anybody suggest a well-established or well-applied traffic model > for wireless ad hoc sensor network? Someone used uniform distribution > for each node. I personally do not incline to it. > Any advice will be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot, > > Zheng Maria Wang -- b _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 19 20:59:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11272 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:59:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Atzw8-0005LU-B3 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:58:43 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1K1weDF020544 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:58:40 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Atzw8-0005LH-7T for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:58:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11258 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:58:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Atzw5-0005u9-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:58:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Atzv9-0005qn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:57:40 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Atzup-0005nk-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:57:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtzuX-0004q2-Kt; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:57:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AtzuB-0004oq-24 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:56:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11206 for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:56:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Atzu8-0005md-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:56:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AtztB-0005kR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:55:37 -0500 Received: from holly.csn.ul.ie ([136.201.105.4]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Atzse-0005eW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:55:05 -0500 Received: from skynet.csn.ul.ie (skynet [136.201.105.2]) by holly.csn.ul.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B2B4936FF; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 01:54:25 +0000 (Eire) Received: by skynet.csn.ul.ie (Postfix, from userid 2220) id 95245E9E4; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 01:54:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by skynet.csn.ul.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89BA5727C; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 01:54:24 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 01:54:24 +0000 (GMT) From: Bryan Hogan X-X-Sender: bryan@skynet To: #LI ZHUOWEI# Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] How to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in NS-2 In-Reply-To: <052033A55521254893A4E2041957E1D0A6A040@mail03.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> Message-ID: References: <052033A55521254893A4E2041957E1D0A6A040@mail03.student.main.ntu.edu.sg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, If you were to use DSR, you can do it by modifying the recv() method such that packets meeting certain critera are droped or corrupted. more info on this can be found at the below address Bryan Bryan's DSR FAQ - http://www.geocities.com/b_j_hogan On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, #LI ZHUOWEI# wrote: > Hi, > > I am doing some research to provide security to MANET. However, I am st= uck by the way how to simulate one or more malicious node(s) in one MANET= scenario, such the nodes that drops the forwarding packets intentively, = or absorbs all packets to it, or duplicates the forwarding packets. Is th= ere any solution to this problem. Any suggestion is welcome. > > > Regards! > > Sincerely yours, > Li Zhuowei > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ > Ph.D. candidate > Email: zhwei.li@pmail.ntu.edu.sg > More: http://www.cais.ntu.edu.sg/~zhuowei > =A1=A1 > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 20 07:51:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA19487 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:51:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuA72-0006rF-Qg for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:50:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1KCoaDH026357 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:50:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuA72-0006r2-LW for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:50:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA19429 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:50:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuA71-0004O0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:50:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuA5x-0004Cx-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:49:29 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuA4l-00041C-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:48:15 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AuA4m-00065L-2M for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:48:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuA4X-0006Dx-NB; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:48:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuA3Z-00062c-Dx for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:47:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA18984 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:46:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuA3Y-0003nq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:47:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuA2H-0003Zc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:45:41 -0500 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuA17-0003PP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:44:29 -0500 Received: from dagger.cc.vt.edu (IDENT:mirapoint@evil-dagger [10.1.1.11]) by lennier.cc.vt.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1KCiTmw014100 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:44:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from zathras (zathras.cc.vt.edu [198.82.162.117]) by dagger.cc.vt.edu (MOS 3.4.3-CR) with ESMTP id AHD73739; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:44:26 -0500 (EST) X-WebMail-UserID: kphanse Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:44:26 -0500 From: kphanse To: manet@ietf.org X-EXP32-SerialNo: 00002216 Message-ID: <409E358B@zathras> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Infinite Mobile Delivery (Hydra) SMTP v3.62.01 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Oscillations and instability in MANET routing Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, I was wondering if there is any study done on oscillations and instability in MANET routing protocols, and on transient analysis of topology changes in MANETs. Any comments or pointers with regards to these topics would be much appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Kaustubh _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 20 13:52:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06566 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:52:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuFku-00041R-5x for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:52:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1KIq869015455 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:52:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuFku-00041C-0P for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:52:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06522 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:52:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuFkr-0007WR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:52:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuFjw-0007SN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:51:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuFj3-0007PG-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:50:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuFit-0003R1-Ni; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:50:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuFi3-0003Kb-Jk for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:49:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06433 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:49:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuFi1-0007Le-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:49:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuFhA-0007Im-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:48:16 -0500 Received: from web41301.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.186]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuFgt-0007En-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:47:59 -0500 Message-ID: <20040220184729.32740.qmail@web41301.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.42.64.251] by web41301.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:47:29 PST Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:47:29 -0800 (PST) From: dgs hfjkd To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] Landmark routing Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, FROM_HAS_ULINE_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello, Can someone tell me where I can get the paper: "Landmark Routing: architecture, algorithms and issues" Techincal report MTR-87W00174, MITRE corporation, May 1988. I looked at MITRE's archives but couldn't find it. It would greatly help me if you could send me a soft copy if you have one. Thanks Mohammed. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 20 18:09:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA20043 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuJls-0001Dk-6x for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:24 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1KN9OWq004686 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuJls-0001DV-2y for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA19944 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuJlp-0003ND-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuJks-0003GZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:08:23 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuJjt-0003BY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:07:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuJja-0008VN-Qe; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:07:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuJip-00088S-Cv for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:06:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA19563 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:06:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuJim-000351-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:06:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuJho-000311-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:05:13 -0500 Received: from gamma.isi.edu ([128.9.144.145]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuJgt-0002xX-00; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:04:15 -0500 Received: from ISI.EDU (jet.isi.edu [128.9.160.87]) by gamma.isi.edu (8.11.6p2+0917/8.11.2) with ESMTP id i1KN4Fk13146; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:04:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200402202304.i1KN4Fk13146@gamma.isi.edu> To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, manet@ietf.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary=NextPart Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:04:14 -0800 Subject: [manet] RFC 3684 on Topology Dissemination Based on Reverse-Path Forwarding (TBRPF) Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 --NextPart A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 3684 Title: Topology Dissemination Based on Reverse-Path Forwarding (TBRPF) Author(s): R. Ogier, F. Templin, M. Lewis Status: Experimental Date: February 2004 Mailbox: ogier@erg.sri.com, ftemplin@iprg.nokia.com, lewis@erg.sri.com Pages: 46 Characters: 107963 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-manet-tbrpf-11.txt URL: ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3684.txt Topology Dissemination Based on Reverse-Path Forwarding (TBRPF) is a proactive, link-state routing protocol designed for mobile ad-hoc networks, which provides hop-by-hop routing along shortest paths to each destination. Each node running TBRPF computes a source tree (providing paths to all reachable nodes) based on partial topology information stored in its topology table, using a modification of Dijkstra's algorithm. To minimize overhead, each node reports only *part* of its source tree to neighbors. TBRPF uses a combination of periodic and differential updates to keep all neighbors informed of the reported part of its source tree. Each node also has the option to report additional topology information (up to the full topology), to provide improved robustness in highly mobile networks. TBRPF performs neighbor discovery using "differential" HELLO messages which report only *changes* in the status of neighbors. This results in HELLO messages that are much smaller than those of other link-state routing protocols such as OSPF. This document is a product of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution.echo Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the RFCs. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="RFC-INFO@RFC-EDITOR.ORG" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <040220150242.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> RETRIEVE: rfc DOC-ID: rfc3684 --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="rfc3684.txt"; site="ftp.isi.edu"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="in-notes" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <040220150242.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 20 19:01:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA23635 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:01:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuKaL-0008UP-I5 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:01:33 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1L01X3K032633 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:01:33 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuKaL-0008UG-EO for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:01:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA23632 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:01:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuKaI-0000EW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:01:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuKZK-00009U-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:00:31 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuKYz-00004L-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:00:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuKYu-00089n-V9; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:00:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuKYB-00083q-5b for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:59:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA23499 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:59:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuKY7-000028-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:59:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuKXJ-0007mD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:58:26 -0500 Received: from trinity.critical-systems.no ([194.143.111.171] helo=trinity.gnist.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuKWT-0007hS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:57:33 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by trinity.gnist.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9254763309D for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:57:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from trinity.gnist.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (trinity.gnist.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 79708-01 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:57:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from olsr.org (161.80-203-46.nextgentel.com [80.203.46.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by trinity.gnist.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14CD4633096 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:57:25 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <40369ED3.9020603@olsr.org> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:57:07 +0100 From: Andreas T Organization: olsr.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] OLSR - link hysteresis questions Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, I have just finished implementing link hysteresis in the UniK OLSR=20 deamon. However - I have a couple of questions regarding my=20 understanding of the described functioning(RFC3626 section 14). The part I am uncertain of is the cases in which the "instability rule"=20 should be applied. Section 14.3 states: [QUOTE] The loss of OLSR packet is detected by tracking the missing Packet Sequence Numbers on a per interface basis and by "long period of silence" from a node. A "long period of silence may be detected thus: if no OLSR packet has been received on interface I from interface NI during HELLO emission interval of interface NI (computed from the Htime field in the last HELLO message received from NI), a loss of an OLSR packet is detected. {/QUOTE] 1. "a long periode of silence" implementation I have implemented detection of "a long period of silence" in this way: A link tuple records the following in addition to the fields specified=20 in the RFC: next_hello_timer - a timer describing withing what time a new HELLO=20 should be received on this link. last_htime - last recorded htime value from the neighbor(which this link=20 connects us to). Upon receiving a HELLO the next_hello_timer is set to now + received=20 htime(+ some slack) and the last_htime is set to the received htime. the link set is constantly checked for timed out entris with regards to=20 the next_hello_timer. If a links next_hello_timer is timed out - a "long=20 period of silence" is considered detected and the instabillity rule is=20 applied to that links link_quality. The next_hello_timer is the set to=20 now + last_htime to be able to detect another "long periode of silence". I assume this is the correct way to do this? Or should this test not be=20 "reset" once a long period of silence is detected? Comments are appreciated. 2. Loss of packets To detect a missing packet section 14.3 suggests checking "Packet=20 Aequence numbers". This is the sequence number of the "generic OLSR=20 packet header" - not any of the message sequence numbers. The way I see it - this leads to a situation I am not sure hysteresis=20 was intended to lead to: Lets look at a situation with nodes A and B running OLSR with=20 link-hysteresis using the proposed values(scaling=3D0.5, upper=20 threshold=3D0.8 and lower threashold=3D0.8). We'll look at the situation = fra=20 As point of wiev: - A has received a continues series of HELLO messages from B which has=20 set As entry of B->L_link_quality to 0.99. - A then misses out on ONE of Bs HELLO messages. This leads to the instabillity rule beeing applied on As registered=20 B->L_link_quality due to a detected "long periode of silence". As=20 B->L-link_quality would now be ~0.5. This is not beneath the lower=20 threshold so no change in link state is set. But as soon as a receives the next HELLO message from B a missing=20 package is detected due to the Packet Sequence Number of the received=20 OLSR packet. So the instabillity rule is applied to B->L_link_quality=20 again. This time it ends up at ~0.25 which is below the lower treshold=20 so the link status is recalculated and the neighbor is set to be asymetri= c. Ofcause B->L_link_quality is recalculated immedeatley since the=20 stabillity rule is to be applied upon every received HELLO - but this=20 will not bring the quality up above the upper treshold. Upon the next=20 received HELLO(in sequence) the quality will be high enough for the=20 status to be recalculated. This means that missing out on _ONE_ HELLO packet causes a link(and=20 therefore a neighbor if no other symmetric links to it exist) to be set=20 to asymmetric and the MPR set and routingtable to be recalculated. Is this the way hysteresis is supposed to work? Should seqno checking=20 not be applied to links that have experienced a "long period of=20 silience"? Or am I missing something here? regards, Andreas T --=20 --=20 Andreas T=F8nnesen(andreas@olsr.org) UniK University Graduation Center University of Oslo http://www.olsr.org _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 21 11:58:08 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA07287 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:58:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuaRg-00027Z-W9 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:57:41 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1LGveGG008149 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:57:40 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuaRg-00027M-QG for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:57:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA07171 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:57:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuaRf-0007e1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:57:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuaQ4-0007MQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:56:01 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuaOt-0007En-03 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:54:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AuaJa-0006DB-16 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:49:18 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuaJK-0001Ra-NA; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:49:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AuaJI-0001Qm-2D for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:49:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06734 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:48:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuaJB-0006iG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:48:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AuaIC-0006e4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:47:53 -0500 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.232]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AuaHr-0006av-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:47:31 -0500 Received: from user-38lc08h.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.1.17] helo=erg.sri.com) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AuaHh-0006UL-00; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:47:22 -0800 Message-ID: <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:47:15 -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: "Charles E. Perkins" CC: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here is an example where the MPRF protocol does not work. (Although it can be fixed as explained below.) 8 / \ 2-----5 / \ / \ / \ / \ 1 / 7 \ / \ / \ / \ / 3-----6 \ / 9 Node 1 is the source (originator of flooded packets), and its MPRs are nodes 2 and 3. Node 2 selects node 6 as MPR (to cover 3, 7, and 9) Node 3 selects node 5 as MPR (to cover 2, 7, and 8). Node 1 originates a packet, which is relayed by nodes 2 and 3. Suppose node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, then from node 3. Suppose node 6 receives the packet first from node 3, then from node 2. (I explain below how this is possible.) Since node 2 is not an MPR selector of node 5, node 5 does not relay the packet when it is received from node 2, but creates an entry in the Flooding History (step 5.1 in the draft). Then, when node 5 receives the packet from node 3 (its MPR selector), node 5 ignores the packet (step 2 in the draft). Therefore, node 5 does not relay the packet. Similarly, node 6 does not relay the packet. Therefore, node 7 never receives the packet. I think the solution is for each node to remember which flooded packets it has already transmitted. If a node receives a flooded packet from an MPR selector, and has not yet transmitted the same packet, then it should relay the packet. I think the same problem exists in draft-spagnolo-manet-ospf-wireless-interface-00 I can think of 3 situations that can result in the above example (in which node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, and node 6 receives the packet first from node 3): 1. Very long propagation delays. 2. As stated in the Introduction of the draft, link layer broadcast can be accomplished using iterated unicast. 3. If the flooded packet is sent reliably to all neighbors using ACKs with retransmissions, then the first transmission from node 2 (resp. 3) might be received only by node 5 (resp. 6). Regards, Richard P.S. Regarding the terms "reflood" and "retransmit". "Reflood" means to flood the packet again to all nodes. RFC 2328 for OSPF uses this term correctly, but some people have recently used it to mean "relay". "Retransmit" means for the same node to transmit the packet again, usually because an ACK was not received. It will be very confusing when we talk about reliable flooding with ACKs, if we use the word "retransmit" to mean both retransmission from the same node, and relaying a packet received from another node. When talking about a node relaying a packet, I suggest using either the term "relay" or "transmit". _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 21 17:13:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA16408 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:13:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufMq-0001Vb-W5 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:13:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1LMD0IL005793 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:13:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufMq-0001VM-MO for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:13:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA16389 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:12:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufMo-0002BM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:12:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AufLq-00027y-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:11:58 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufLA-00025Q-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:11:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufKw-0001Gc-H2; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:11:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufKq-0001G3-TB for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:10:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA16359 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:10:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufKo-00024s-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:10:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AufJs-00023A-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:09:57 -0500 Received: from web20727.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.226.117]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufJX-00021B-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:09:35 -0500 Message-ID: <20040221220935.73841.qmail@web20727.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [130.126.142.159] by web20727.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 14:09:35 PST Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 14:09:35 -0800 (PST) From: Sundar K To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] strong interfering signals Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, Could anyone clarify on the following scenario in a MANET: Assume that a node X is receiving a data packet from node Y. Assume that in the meantime, node Z (in the near vicinity of X) initiates transmission to node X. I understand that with the CSThreshold being below the RxThreshold in 802.11, such a situation may not be likely. However, assuming that a situation as this occurs, node X would fail be able to recieve Y's packet successfully. Now, if the signal strength of the interfering signal from Z is sufficiently strong at X, would X be able to receive the packet from Z, successfully ? thanks in advance, sundar __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 21 17:24:44 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17179 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufXk-0002X2-Nt for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:17 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1LMOGtw009726 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:16 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufXk-0002Wn-KW for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17134 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufXi-0003PP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AufWj-0003Iu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:23:14 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufVv-0003DJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:22:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufVa-00023I-8s; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:22:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufUf-000211-Os for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:21:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA16940 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:21:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufUd-00032g-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:21:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AufTb-0002vB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:20:00 -0500 Received: from [218.22.21.7] (helo=ustc.edu) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufSn-0002en-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:19:10 -0500 Received: (qmail 14820 invoked by uid 0); 21 Feb 2004 22:18:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO greenpiece) (dong.wang@[132.189.76.10]) (envelope-sender ) by 0 (magicmail-2.1) with SMTP for ; 21 Feb 2004 22:18:32 -0000 From: "Dong Wang" To: Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:18:23 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c3f8c8$a27155b0$b11cbd84@greenpiece> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C3F896.57D6E5B0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: [manet] A topology control question? Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C3F896.57D6E5B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Recently, I read several papers about topology control. My understanding is that, topology control algorithms generate, or derive, a simpler topology from the original one constructed under the common maximum transmission range. And all routing algorithms then select routes based on the new topology. Here are several points that I don't quite understand: 1. While maintaining connectivity, topology control aims at saving energy by considering each node or considering the network as a whole? 2. Seems each node adjusts its transmission level only when the original network topology has been changed, no matter which node it's going to transmit data to, does it? 3. Topology control removes some connectivity information from the original topology, however, I observed that such a removed link between a node and one of its neighbors may be the part of the optimal route (which costs the lest energy) to a destination, therefore topology control actually deviates from its purpose -- save energy. I will appreciate your explanation. Thank you. Gary W University of Minnesota ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C3F896.57D6E5B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hi,
 
    Recently, I read several papers about topology control. My = understanding=20 is that, topology control algorithms generate, or derive, a simpler = topology=20 from the original one constructed under the common maximum transmission = range.=20 And all routing algorithms then select routes based on the new topology. =
 
    Here are several points that I don't quite=20 understand:
  1. While = maintaining=20 connectivity, topology control aims at saving energy by = considering each=20 node or considering the network as a whole?
  2. Seems = each node=20 adjusts its transmission level only when the original network topology = has=20 been changed, no matter which node it's going to transmit data to, = does=20 it?
  3. Topology control=20 removes some connectivity information from the original topology, = however, I=20 observed that such a removed link between a node and one of its = neighbors=20 may be the part of the optimal route (which costs the lest = energy) to a=20 destination, therefore topology control actually deviates from its = purpose --=20 save energy.
    I=20 will appreciate your explanation. Thank you.
 
Gary=20 W
University of=20 Minnesota
------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C3F896.57D6E5B0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 21 17:26:44 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17296 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:26:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufZh-0002pS-JE for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:26:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1LMQHMS010868 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:26:17 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufZh-0002pD-Fy for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:26:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17257 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:26:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufZf-0003cJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:26:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AufYY-0003V4-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:25:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufXh-0003PQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufXV-0002Pv-Di; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:24:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AufWk-0002JZ-8h for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:23:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17084 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:23:10 -0500 (EST) From: jomullen@nmsu.edu Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufWh-0003IV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:23:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AufVr-0003Cm-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:22:20 -0500 Received: from cheech.nmsu.edu ([128.123.34.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AufV6-000374-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:21:33 -0500 Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cheech.nmsu.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id i1LMLUl00331; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:21:30 -0700 Received: from 216.234.193.222 ( [216.234.193.222]) as user jomullen@ccserver2.nmsu.edu by webmail.nmsu.edu with HTTP; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:21:29 -0700 Message-ID: <1077402089.4037d9ea05e24@webmail.nmsu.edu> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:21:30 -0700 To: Sundar K Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] strong interfering signals References: <20040221220935.73841.qmail@web20727.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040221220935.73841.qmail@web20727.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.0 X-Originating-IP: 216.234.193.222 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, Consider the following situation. Y --------- X ----------- Z If X is at the extreme limit of transmission range and Z is about twice as far away, Z might not sense Y's carrier. Here is another Z ============ Y X The =S represent a RF barrier, such as a building or a hill. Both Y and Z can reach X, but neither can detect each other's signal. John Mullen Quoting Sundar K : > Hi, > > Could anyone clarify on the following scenario in a > MANET: > > Assume that a node X is receiving a data packet from > node Y. Assume that in the meantime, node Z (in the > near vicinity of X) initiates transmission to node X. > > I understand that with the CSThreshold being below the > RxThreshold in 802.11, such a situation may not be > likely. > > However, assuming that a situation as this occurs, > node X would fail be able to recieve Y's packet > successfully. Now, if the signal strength of the > interfering signal from Z is sufficiently strong at X, > would X be able to receive the packet from Z, > successfully ? > > thanks in advance, > sundar > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 01:37:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26719 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:37:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Av9iA-0002N7-Tp for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:37:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1N6b2Xw009111 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:37:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Av9iA-0002Mk-Fd for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:37:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26689 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:36:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Av9i7-0005X8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:36:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Av9hA-0005SR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:36:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Av9gL-0005PM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:35:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Av9gG-00020g-E0; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:35:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Av9fI-0001zL-Fi for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:34:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26610 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:34:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Av9fF-0005Le-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:34:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Av9eL-0005Is-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:33:06 -0500 Received: from bay12-f28.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.28] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Av9dv-0005FO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:32:39 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:32:09 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 06:32:09 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:02:09 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Feb 2004 06:32:09.0979 (UTC) FILETIME=[C3CC9CB0:01C3F9D6] Subject: [manet] Size of Traces Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello everybody, After reading ur views on the size of tora traces due to high mobility. i have reduced the mobility to 10m/s but increased the number of connections during simulation time which is 200 sec and 200 connections in between. used cbrgen.tcl fro generating the traffic. now the traces are coming with size more than 300MB. Please also suggest me another script for generating traffic automatically for the simulation environment. Thanx in Advance ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Contact brides & grooms FREE! http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmltag Only on www.shaadi.com. Register now! _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 07:25:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA21507 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:25:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvF96-00029p-PD for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:25:17 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1NCPCMN008289 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:25:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvF96-00029c-F1 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:25:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA21468 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:25:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvF95-0004vK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:25:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvF87-0004qd-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:24:13 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvF7C-0004nT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:23:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvF70-0001o9-Bt; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:23:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvF6C-0001mR-3Z for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:22:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA21422 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:22:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvF6B-0004jm-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:22:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvF5H-0004gV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:21:16 -0500 Received: from gemini.rz.uni-ulm.de ([134.60.246.16] helo=mail.rz.uni-ulm.de) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvF4N-0004cu-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:20:19 -0500 Received: from informatik.uni-ulm.de (G76e1.g.pppool.de [80.185.118.225]) by mail.rz.uni-ulm.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1NCKHur012536 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 13:20:17 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <4039F00D.9040004@informatik.uni-ulm.de> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 13:20:29 +0100 From: Frank Kargl Organization: University of Ulm User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031208 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-DCC-RollaNet-Metrics: gemini 1004; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by mail.rz.uni-ulm.de id i1NCKHur012536 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] CfP Wireless Personal Area and Ad-hoc Networks Minitrack at HICSS-38 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please accept our apologies if you receive this CfP multiple times. CALL FOR PAPERS Wireless Personal Area and Ad-hoc Networks Part of the Software Technologies Track Thirty-eighth Annual HAWAI'I INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEM SCIENCES January 3 - 6, 2005 Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort on the Big Island of Hawaii Additional detail may be found on HICSS primary web site: http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu Mirror sites: http://hicss.sepa.tudelft.nl/ and http://www.is.cityu.edu.hk/hicss/ Minitrack web site: http://crystal.uta.edu/~zaruba/hicss38/ MINITRACK CO-CHAIRS Dr. Frank Kargl, University of Ulm, Germany (frank.kargl@informatik.uni-ulm.edu) Dr. Elaine Lawrence, University of Technology, Sydney (elaine@it.uts.edu.au) Prof. Gergely Z=E1ruba, University of Texas at Arlington, USA (zaruba@uta.edu) SCOPE OF MINITRACK This minitrack will cover both the area of Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) and Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs). Wireless personal area networks (WPANs) are short to very short- range wireless networks that can be used to exchange information between devices in the reach of a person. WPANs can be used to replace cables between computers and their peripherals, to establish communities helping people do their everyday chores making them more productive, or to establish location aware services. Today PDAs, phones, laptops include WPAN technology and it is predicted that the number of small WPAN enabled devices (e.g., pens, cameras, headsets, various sensors) will soon outnumber the computers on the Internet. A typical example of a WPAN technology is Bluetooth. Research work in the recent years (incl. the one published as part of former WPAN minitracks at HICSS) shows, that there are numerous interesting new application ideas but also a number of unresolved technical issues (such as speeding up the inquiry process, efficient Scatternet routing, etc). The IEEE 802 committee has also realized the importance of short- range wireless networking and initiated the establishment of the IEEE 802.15 working group to standardize protocols and interfaces for wireless personal area networking. Today, WPAN research covers a very broad area, starting from technical issues like automatic formation of networks or security issues and going up all the stack to the question what kind of applications will be used in WPANs. The construction of more complex networks using WPAN technology leads to the second topic of our minitrack: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks. Whereas the idea of creating infrastructure-less mobile networks dates back into the seventies (e.g. the PRNET experiment) and to early experiments in the military sector it is not until the nineties that this form of networks received a significant attention in the research community. The initial but still ongoing works focused on developing different routing protocols for MANETs, like AODV, DSR, OLSR and many more. Later other aspects of MANETs were included, like security, quality of service, and applications. Today research in ad-hoc networks gathers mostly around the IETF MANET working group, continuing the research in routing protocols, and the IRTF ANS research group, focusing in the scalability of ad hoc networks. Today ad hoc networks are one of the most active research fields in the area of wireless networking. In addition to the question on how routing in MANETs should be organized, a lot of surrounding issues regarding MANETs are not yet resolved (like security, QoS, scalability issues, application scenarios, etc.). Another key issue is the inter-working of wireless technologies to create heterogeneous wireless networks. For instance, WPANs, WLANs and MANETs will enable an extension of the third generation (3G) cellular networks (i.e., UMTS and cdma2000) into devices without direct cellular access thus pointing towards next generation wireless networking. Moreover, devices interconnected in a WPAN may form larger MANETs or may be able to utilize a combination of 3G access and WLAN access by selecting the access that is best for the moment. In such networks 3G, WLAN, MANET and WPAN technologies do not compete against each other but enable the user to select the best connectivity for his/her purposes. Our goal is to bring together leading researchers in the two fields of research in order to present new results and discuss synergies between the two areas. Areas of interest include but are not limited to: * Bluetooth based networks (e.g. Inquiry, Scatternet-Routing, Profiles, Applications, etc.) * Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (e.g. Routing, Scalability, Address-Assignment, ...) * Performance evaluations * Security issues * Privacy and Legal Issues * Service discovery and usage * Interoperability between different wireless networking technologies and heterogeneous wireless infrastructures * Applications * New forms of communications in WPANs and MANETs (e.g. using the P2P paradigm in MANETs) IMPORTANT DEADLINES March 31, 2004 Authors contact Minitrack Chairs for guidance and indication of appropriate content. (Optional) June 15, 2004 Authors submit full papers to the appropriate Minitrack following format and submission instructions on the web site. August 15, 2004 Minitrack Chairs send Acceptance/Rejection notices to Authors. October 1, 2004 Authors submit Final Version of paper electronically to publisher. At least one author of each paper must register by this date to attend the conference to present the paper. December 1, 2004 Deadline to guarantee your hotel room reservation at the conference rate. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAPER SUBMISSION * HICSS papers must contain original material not previously published, or currently submitted elsewhere. * Consult the conference website for the listing and description of Minitracks for HICSS-38. * (optional) Contact the Minitrack Chair(s) by email for guidance and verification of appropriate content. * Do not submit the manuscript to more than one Minitrack Chair. If unsure of which Minitrack is appropriate, submit abstract to the Track Chair for guidance. * Submit your full paper according to the detailed formatting and submission instructions found on the HICSS website. Note: All papers will be submitted in double column publication format and limited to 10 pages including diagrams and references. HICSS-38 CONFERENCE TRACKS * Collaboration Systems and Technology - Co-Chair: Jay Nunamaker; E-mail: jnunamaker@cmi.arizona.edu; Co-Chair: Robert O. Briggs; E-mail: bob@GroupSystems.com * Complex Systems - Chair: Robert Thomas; E-mail: rjt1@cornell.edu * Decision Technologies for Management - Chair: Dan Dolk; E-mail: drdolk@nps.navy.mil * Digital Documents and the Media - Chair: Michael Shepherd; E-mail: shepherd@cs.cal.ca * Emerging Technologies - Chair: Ralph H. Sprague; E-mail: sprague@hawaii.edu * Information Technology in Health Care - Chair: William Chismar; E-mail: chismar@cba.hawaii.edu * Internet & the Digital Economy - Co-Chair: David King; E-mail: david.king@jda.com Co-Chair: Alan Dennis; E-mail: ardennis@indiana.edu * Organizational Systems & Technology - Chair: Hugh Watson; Email: hwatson@terry.uga.edu * Software Technology - Chair: Gul Agha; E-mail: agha@cs.uiuc.edu HICSS conferences are devoted to advances in the information, computer, and system sciences, and encompass developments in both theory and practice. Invited papers may be theoretical, conceptual, tutorial or descriptive in nature. Submissions undergo a peer referee process and those selected for presentation will be published in the Conference Proceedings. Submissions must not have been previously published. For the latest information; visit the HICSS web site at: http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu or the mirror sites : http://hicss.sepa.tudelft.nl/ and http://www.is.cityu.edu.hk/hicss/ CONFERENCE ADMINISTRATION Ralph Sprague, Conference Chair Email: sprague@hawaii.edu Sandra Laney, Conference Administrator Email: hicss@hawaii.edu Eileen Robichaud Dennis, Track Administrator Email: eidennis@indiana.edu 2005 CONFERENCE VENUE Hilton Waikoloa Village (on the Big Island of Hawaii) 425 Waikoloa Beach Drive Waikoloa, Hawaii 96738 Tel: 1-808-886-1234 Fax: 1-808-886-2900 www.hiltonwaikoloavillage.com --=20 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Frank Kargl Multimedia Computing/University of Ulm/Germany http://medien.informatik.uni-ulm.de/~frank/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Use the SOURCE, Luke ! I feel a great disturbance in the SOURCE. But beware of the Microsoft side of the SOURCE ! _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 10:22:02 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02095 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:22:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvHtn-0007bG-Fe for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:21:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1NFLZAB029210 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:21:35 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvHtn-0007b0-9A for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:21:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA01890 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:21:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvHtk-0004hW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:21:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvHsl-0004ae-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:20:32 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvHrv-0004Uq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:19:39 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvHre-0006l4-V4; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:19:22 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvHqn-0006ZE-IZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:18:29 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA01480 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:18:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvHql-0004NE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:18:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvHpw-0004HI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:17:36 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvHpC-00047a-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:16:50 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1NFGIs5001234; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:16:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004022310161829378 ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:16:18 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.2.20040223101240.02b70ec0@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:16:27 -0500 To: manet@ietf.org From: Joe Macker Cc: zinin@psg.com, fenner@research.att.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [manet] Draft MANET Agenda for Seoul Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 This is what I have as a rough agenda for next week. As mentioned before, the WG chairs will be absent and this short meeting will be chaired by the Routing ADs. Thanks Bill and Alex. -Joe ------------------------------------------------------------------- Tuesday, March 2 at 1300-1400 ================================== Routing ADs will Chair Session Bill Fenner Alex Zinin WG Chairs (Absent in Seoul): Joe Macker Scott Corson DRAFT AGENDA: Agenda Bashing and Status 5 mins - e.g., TBRPF and DSR Document Status MANET-OSPF Database Exchange draft-clausen-manet-ospf-dbx-00.txt. 10 min Clausen MANET Address Autoconfiguration Issues 10 min Jeong draft-jeong-manet-addr-autoconf-reqts-01.txt draft-jeong-adhoc-ip-addr-autoconf-02.txt draft-jeong-manet-aodv-addr-autoconf-00.txt Internet Connectivity for AODV 5 min Cha draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt MPRF Draft and Related Discussions 10 min Perkins,et al Any MANET-OSPF Progress Discussion? 10 min Open Discussion Remaining time Chairs/All 10 min ------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 10:48:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03179 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:48:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvIJ1-0001Ui-0m for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:47:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1NFldHh005738 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:47:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvIJ0-0001UT-QP for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:47:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03175 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:47:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvIIy-0006sR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:47:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvIHn-0006lq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:46:24 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvIHY-0006hu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:46:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvIHT-0001Ah-1b; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:46:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvIGo-00019O-BJ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:45:22 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03101 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:45:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvIGl-0006hV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:45:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvIFp-0006e5-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:44:22 -0500 Received: from web21101.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.227.103]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvIF3-0006an-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:43:33 -0500 Message-ID: <20040223154222.35433.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.119.86.30] by web21101.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:42:22 PST Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:42:22 -0800 (PST) From: Vin To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [manet] gateway handoffs in internet gateway support for manet's Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi.Can anyone point me to any implementation of Internet Gateway support in Manet's,where the gateway's are switched(or handoff you can say) in the middle of simulation? I am trying to do something like that in NS2 and am wondering how to setup my traffic connection file. The problem is that i cant give a static connection file,as i dont know if and when gateways will need to be switched. One way would be to specify the end points(manet node and corresponding node,CN, on internet) and leave it to the routing protocol.But I am trying to just focus on the manet side plus gateways and not on CN's on the internet and would be better if i can do things witohut involving CN's. Look forward to some useful tips. Thanks in advance, Vinod __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 15:44:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA19056 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:44:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvMvY-0000f0-2i for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:43:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1NKhi3j002532 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:43:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvMvX-0000el-Uc for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:43:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA19035 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:43:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvMvW-000230-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:43:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvMuU-0001xN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:42:39 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvMu7-0001s8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:42:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvMtt-0000Gx-E1; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:42:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvMtI-0000DY-6l for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:41:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18943 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:41:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvMtG-0001pd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:41:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvMsI-0001j7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:40:22 -0500 Received: from mail1.engr.ucsb.edu ([128.111.53.4] helo=smtp.engr.ucsb.edu) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvMrJ-0001bF-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:39:22 -0500 Received: from linux25.engr.ucsb.edu ([128.111.53.127]:32811) by smtp.engr.ucsb.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AvMqK-0006BK-2n; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:38:20 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:39:17 -0800 (PST) From: Rachit Chawla X-X-Sender: To: Vin cc: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: Determined clean by smtp.engr.ucsb.edu using Clam AntiVirus X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: chawla@engineering.ucsb.edu Subject: Re: [manet] gateway handoffs in internet gateway support for manet's (fwd) Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.1 (built Fri Nov 7 10:57:29 PST 2003) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 hi, You might want to look at Comet research group's work at Columbia Unniversity. They have some ns-2 extensions which might be useful for you. They have Cellular-IP, see if it is helpful. Visit http://comet.ctr.columbia.edu/ --Rachit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Rachit Chawla MS, Computer Engineering Electrical & Computer Engineering Department University of California, Santa Barbara ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Vin wrote: > Hi.Can anyone point me to any implementation of > Internet Gateway support in Manet's,where the > gateway's are switched(or handoff you can say) in the > middle of simulation? > I am trying to do something like that in NS2 and am > wondering how to setup my traffic connection file. The > problem is that i cant give a static connection > file,as i dont know if and when gateways will need to > be switched. > > One way would be to specify the end points(manet node > and corresponding node,CN, on internet) and leave it > to the routing protocol.But I am trying to just focus > on the manet side plus gateways and not on CN's on the > internet and would be better if i can do things > witohut involving CN's. > Look forward to some useful tips. > > Thanks in advance, > Vinod > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 19:38:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA04914 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:38:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvQZx-0005k6-4U for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:37:41 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1O0bfDn022063 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:37:41 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvQZv-0005je-Tz for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:37:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA04911 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:37:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvQZu-0000hu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:37:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvQYv-0000dg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:36:38 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvQYY-0000aC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:36:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvQYN-0005KP-DM; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:36:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvQXt-0005Jg-TX for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:35:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA04871 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:35:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvQXs-0000Z6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:35:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvQWt-0000Vm-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:34:32 -0500 Received: from cms4.etri.re.kr ([129.254.16.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvQVy-0000Ps-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:33:35 -0500 Received: from jafywinxp (pd412h.etri.re.kr [129.254.112.174]) by cms4.etri.re.kr with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id FHDWH108; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:33:30 +0900 Reply-To: From: "HyunWook Cha" To: "'Vin'" , Subject: RE: [manet] gateway handoffs in internet gateway support for manet's Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:31:15 +0900 Message-ID: <000001c3fa6d$8382c2f0$ae70fe81@jafywinxp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20040223154222.35433.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, Vinod. Handoff between MANET gateways can be resolved by the same way in Mobile IP since MANET nodes configure global addresses from gateway advs,(Potentially all nodes may be in one subnet.) So, actual gateway switch occurs dynamically, though you can force that simulation codes do it at the time you want (invoking NS2 agent's method related to handoff from script side. ) [snip] > One way would be to specify the end points(manet node > and corresponding node,CN, on internet) and leave it > to the routing protocol.But I am trying to just focus > on the manet side plus gateways and not on CN's on the > internet and would be better if i can do things > witohut involving CN's. To preserve end to end ongoing session between a MANET node and CN, a registration mechanism is needed, in which the MANET node registers its new address affiliated in new gateway(say NG) with current gateway(say OG). This is similar to the home registration. For implemation of this, interoperation of MIP and MANET routing protcols can be applied. (I know a lot of papers from this approaches.) Though there are much room to be complemented, my I-D proposed pure reactive method for reactive routing protocols. In this version, my idea is designe to extend AODV routing protocol but I will propose light registration protocol separated from routing protocol in revised version. I think that this can help in case of macro-mobility in which MIP-MANET mechanism is needed. (You can refer at following URL ; http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-cha-manet-extended-support-glo balv6-00.txt ) Regards, HyunWook > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Vin > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 12:42 AM > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] gateway handoffs in internet gateway support > for manet's > > > > Hi.Can anyone point me to any implementation of > Internet Gateway support in Manet's,where the > gateway's are switched(or handoff you can say) in the > middle of simulation? > I am trying to do something like that in NS2 and am > wondering how to setup my traffic connection file. The > problem is that i cant give a static connection > file,as i dont know if and when gateways will need to > be switched. > > One way would be to specify the end points(manet node > and corresponding node,CN, on internet) and leave it > to the routing protocol.But I am trying to just focus > on the manet side plus gateways and not on CN's on the > internet and would be better if i can do things > witohut involving CN's. > Look forward to some useful tips. > > Thanks in advance, > Vinod > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Feb 23 22:37:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA10511 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:37:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvTNF-0005Z9-G5 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:36:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1O3aj0e021389 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:36:45 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvTNF-0005Yu-8U for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:36:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA10309 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:36:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvTNB-00067t-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:36:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvTME-00062K-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:35:42 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvTLm-0005yn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:35:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvTLb-0005Lx-En; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvTLC-0005LI-Tt for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:34:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA10123 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:34:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvTL9-0005xL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:34:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvTKB-0005tg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:33:35 -0500 Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com ([130.76.64.48]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvTJD-0005nJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:32:35 -0500 Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com ([129.172.13.4]) by slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id TAA24672; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:32:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from blv-hub-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/MBS-AV-02) with ESMTP id TAA11884; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:32:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwbh-01.nw.nos.boeing.com [192.33.62.231]) by blv-hub-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i1O3VFP10114; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:31:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-27.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.48.4.101]) by XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6662); Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:31:40 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [manet] Draft MANET Agenda for Seoul Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:31:40 -0800 Message-ID: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C0406049B@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: [manet] Draft MANET Agenda for Seoul Thread-Index: AcP6IKeRLDvTGIEpSKOgBJ57CQ8rTgAZSMVg From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: "Joe Macker" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2004 03:31:40.0977 (UTC) FILETIME=[B79FCA10:01C3FA86] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'd be happy to present a brief update of the various drafts and discussions on MANET-OSPF since the last meeting, in the slot alloted near the end. Perhaps Thomas Clausen's presentation could be moved adjacent to the MANET-OSPF discussion slot as well. Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Macker [mailto:macker@itd.nrl.navy.mil] > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 7:16 AM > To: manet@ietf.org > Cc: zinin@psg.com; fenner@research.att.com > Subject: [manet] Draft MANET Agenda for Seoul >=20 >=20 > This is what I have as a rough agenda for next week. > As mentioned before, the WG chairs will be absent > and this short meeting will be chaired by the Routing ADs. >=20 > Thanks Bill and Alex. >=20 > -Joe >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Tuesday, March 2 at 1300-1400 > = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > Routing ADs will Chair Session > Bill Fenner > Alex Zinin >=20 > WG Chairs (Absent in Seoul):=20 > Joe Macker > Scott Corson >=20 > DRAFT AGENDA: >=20 > Agenda Bashing and Status 5 mins > - e.g., TBRPF and DSR Document Status >=20 > MANET-OSPF Database Exchange > draft-clausen-manet-ospf-dbx-00.txt. 10 min Clausen >=20 > MANET Address Autoconfiguration Issues 10 min Jeong > draft-jeong-manet-addr-autoconf-reqts-01.txt > draft-jeong-adhoc-ip-addr-autoconf-02.txt > draft-jeong-manet-aodv-addr-autoconf-00.txt >=20 > Internet Connectivity for AODV 5 min Cha > draft-cha-manet-aodv-internet-00.txt >=20 > MPRF Draft and Related Discussions 10 min Perkins,et al >=20 > Any MANET-OSPF Progress Discussion? 10 min =20 >=20 >=20 > Open Discussion Remaining time Chairs/All 10 min >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 01:14:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA17213 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:14:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvVpJ-0000QL-0k for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:13:57 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1O6Dqvu001625 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:13:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvVpI-0000Q8-NV for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:13:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA17189 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:13:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvVpF-00047A-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:13:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvVoQ-000413-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:12:58 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvVnh-0003vQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:12:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvVnV-00009K-8H; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:12:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvVmm-000080-PD for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:11:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA17043 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:11:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvVmj-0003o7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:11:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvVlt-0003fg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:10:21 -0500 Received: from web41305.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.54]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvVkp-0003WK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:09:15 -0500 Message-ID: <20040224060845.57450.qmail@web41305.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.205.153.167] by web41305.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:08:45 PST Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:08:45 -0800 (PST) From: Sochi K To: manet@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1549946577-1077602925=:55392" Subject: [manet] new user - segmentation fault Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_A autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-1549946577-1077602925=:55392 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii hi, i am trying to use glomosim for the first time. upon installing everything, i run ./glomosim config.in, with config.in unchanged after installation. i get the following: Node 0 (280.47, 212.84, 0.00). Node 1 (639.89, 179.14, 0.00). Node 2 (720.11, 198.10, 0.00). Node 3 (1211.61, 216.94, 0.00). . . . Node 27 (1123.50, 1626.44, 0.00). Node 28 (1543.63, 1349.53, 0.00). Node 29 (1855.03, 1626.33, 0.00). Partition 1 (0 2) has range (0, 0) to (0, 0): 30 nodes Current Sim Time[s] = 0.000000000 Real Time[s] = 0 Completed 0% Current Sim Time[s] = 9.073651536 Real Time[s] = 0 Completed 1% Current Sim Time[s] = 18.014513152 Real Time[s] = 0 Completed 2% . . . Current Sim Time[s] = 864.052366162 Real Time[s] = 7 Completed 96% Current Sim Time[s] = 873.064564290 Real Time[s] = 7 Completed 97% Current Sim Time[s] = 882.072024056 Real Time[s] = 7 Completed 98% Current Sim Time[s] = 891.081945395 Real Time[s] = 7 Completed 99% Segmentation fault --------------------------------------- Any help with this? Re-installing produces the same result. Thanks.. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. --0-1549946577-1077602925=:55392 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
 
hi, i am trying to use glomosim for the first time. upon installing everything, i run ./glomosim config.in, with config.in unchanged after installation.
 
i get the following:
 
Node 0 (280.47, 212.84, 0.00).
Node 1 (639.89, 179.14, 0.00).
Node 2 (720.11, 198.10, 0.00).
Node 3 (1211.61, 216.94, 0.00).
.
.
.
Node 27 (1123.50, 1626.44, 0.00).
Node 28 (1543.63, 1349.53, 0.00).
Node 29 (1855.03, 1626.33, 0.00).
Partition 1 (0 2) has range (0, 0) to (0, 0): 30 nodes
Current Sim Time[s] =    0.000000000  Real Time[s] =    0  Completed  0%
Current Sim Time[s] =    9.073651536  Real Time[s] =    0  Completed  1%
Current Sim Time[s] =   18.014513152  Real Time[s] =    0  Completed  2%
.
.
.
Current Sim Time[s] =  864.052366162  Real Time[s] =    7  Completed 96%
Current Sim Time[s] =  873.064564290  Real Time[s] =    7  Completed 97%
Current Sim Time[s] =  882.072024056  Real Time[s] =    7  Completed 98%
Current Sim Time[s] =  891.081945395  Real Time[s] =    7  Completed 99%
Segmentation fault
---------------------------------------
 
Any help with this? Re-installing produces the same result.
 
Thanks..
 

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. --0-1549946577-1077602925=:55392-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 03:58:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA07709 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:58:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvYOH-0002zI-Vq for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:58:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1O8w9pd011478 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:58:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvYOH-0002z3-HR for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:58:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA07678 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:58:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvYOE-00040J-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:58:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvYNQ-0003sr-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:57:16 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvYMR-0003ku-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:56:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvYMF-0002gQ-MX; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:56:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvYM4-0002e9-FU for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:55:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA07431 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:55:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvYM1-0003hh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:55:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvYL6-0003ch-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:54:53 -0500 Received: from smtp1.clb.oleane.net ([213.56.31.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvYKK-0003Ua-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:54:04 -0500 Received: from oleane.com (cust1.clb.oleane.net [213.56.31.97]) (authenticated) by smtp1.clb.oleane.net with ESMTP id i1O8rWd8020710 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:53:32 +0100 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:53:32 +0100 Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sensitivity: 3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "=?utf-8?Q?mg263-8?=" To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?manet?=" X-XaM3-API-Version: 3.2 R32 (B53pl7) X-type: 0 X-SenderIP: 194.206.151.59 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] =?iso-8859-1?Q?WiMAX_Summit?= Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable WiMAX is considered the next step beyond WiFi because it is optimized for= =0D=0Abroadband operation, fixed and later mobile. The WiMAX Summit, to = be organised =0D=0Ain Paris next May 25-28, will gather the most distingu= ished experts and key =0D=0Aplayers in the field.=0D=0A=95 Are WiMAX and = WiFi complementary?=0D=0A=95 When and how will WiMAX evolve towards mobil= ity? =0D=0A=95 Can WiMAX be considered as a migration path to 4G? =0D=0A=95= How is addressed the interoperability challenge? =0D=0AThese questions, = among others, will be addressed during the event.=0D=0A =0D=0AMore detail= s at:=0D=0Ahttp://www.upperside.fr/wimax04/wimax04intro.htm=0D=0A _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 09:30:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA22113 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:30:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvdZY-0001xC-6K for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:30:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1OEU8tg007505 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:30:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvdZX-0001wy-Vi for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:30:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA22088 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:30:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvdZW-00037c-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:30:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvdYX-00030w-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:29:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvdXf-0002un-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:28:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvdXV-0001ZM-OL; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvdXU-0001Z4-93 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:28:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA22057 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:27:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvdXS-0002sr-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:27:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvdWV-0002om-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:27:00 -0500 Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com ([130.76.64.48]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvdVa-0002k8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:26:02 -0500 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com ([192.42.227.216]) by slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id GAA17745 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:26:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from blv-hub-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/MBS-AV-02) with ESMTP id GAA19620 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:25:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwbh-01.nw.nos.boeing.com [192.33.62.231]) by blv-hub-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i1OEN9P17712 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:23:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from xch-nw-26.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.48.4.100]) by XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6662); Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:23:33 -0800 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Subject: RE: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:23:33 -0800 Message-ID: <2AFCB5FA378DEE4CA704B9AD7764637901839BA6@xch-nw-26.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Thread-Index: AcP4mwNSdYgxsIjERPikv0PnFkzg1ACRpZEg From: "Spagnolo, Phillip A" To: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2004 14:23:33.0623 (UTC) FILETIME=[C893F070:01C3FAE1] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Richard, You are correct on the WOSPF draft. We suggest the following change to the draft. This should be an easy change. Thanks for helping. Phil _______________________________________________________________________ 5. Protocol Data Structures This section defines extensions to Section 5 of [OSPF]. LSF duplicate table The Link State Flood duplicate table keeps track of which LSFs have been seen. Each tuple in the table consists of the originator's Router ID, the flooding sequence number, the time at which the entry expires, and a flag that=20 indicates whether the LSF has been flooded. The table should be empty upon initialization. 13.1. LSF message generation Each wireless interface originates an LSF every LSF_INTERVAL. Each time a node generates an LSF it MUST increment the flooding sequence number and add the LSF to the duplicate table. In this table, the node records a duplicate tuple: (originator address, flooding sequence number, expiration time, flooded flag). The flooded flag=20 denotes whether the LSF has been flooded by this node before. The=20 LSF MUST be removed from the duplicate table after it expires. 13.2. LSF message processing Each incoming LSF is searched for in the duplicate table. 1 If the LSF is in the duplicate table, or if the LSF is older=20 than the LSF found in the table proceed with the bullets. =20 An LSF is know to be older if the sequence number of the LSF=20 in the table is greater than the received LSF's sequence=20 number. Standard modulo sequence number comparisons should=20 be applied. a. If the sender is in the MPR selector table, but the=20 flooded flag is not TRUE in the duplicate table then=20 the LSF is flooded out all MANET interfaces, the flooded flag is set to TRUE in the duplicate table,=20 and the LSF packet is discarded b. Else, The LSF packet is discarded. =20 2 Else, the LSF is added to the LSF duplicate table, and the LSAs are processed according to section 13.3. a. If the sender is in the MPR selector table, the LSF is flooded out all MANET interfaces, and the flooded flag is set to TRUE in the duplicate table. b. Else, the flooded flag is set to FALSE in the=20 duplicate table. > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Ogier [mailto:ogier@erg.sri.com]=20 > Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:47 AM > To: Charles E. Perkins > Cc: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document=20 > initial revision >=20 >=20 > Here is an example where the MPRF protocol does not work. > (Although it can be fixed as explained below.) >=20 >=20 > 8 > / \ > 2-----5 > / \ / \ > / \ / \ > 1 / 7 > \ / \ / > \ / \ / > 3-----6 > \ / > 9 >=20 >=20 > Node 1 is the source (originator of flooded packets), > and its MPRs are nodes 2 and 3. > Node 2 selects node 6 as MPR (to cover 3, 7, and 9) > Node 3 selects node 5 as MPR (to cover 2, 7, and 8). >=20 > Node 1 originates a packet, which is relayed by nodes 2 and 3. > Suppose node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, then=20 > from node 3. > Suppose node 6 receives the packet first from node 3, then=20 > from node 2. > (I explain below how this is possible.) > Since node 2 is not an MPR selector of node 5, node 5 does not relay > the packet when it is received from node 2, but creates an entry > in the Flooding History (step 5.1 in the draft). > Then, when node 5 receives the packet from node 3 (its MPR selector), > node 5 ignores the packet (step 2 in the draft). > Therefore, node 5 does not relay the packet. > Similarly, node 6 does not relay the packet. > Therefore, node 7 never receives the packet. >=20 > I think the solution is for each node to remember > which flooded packets it has already transmitted. > If a node receives a flooded packet from an MPR selector, > and has not yet transmitted the same packet, then it > should relay the packet. >=20 > I think the same problem exists in > draft-spagnolo-manet-ospf-wireless-interface-00 >=20 > I can think of 3 situations that can result in the > above example (in which node 5 receives the packet first from > node 2, and node 6 receives the packet first from node 3): >=20 > 1. Very long propagation delays. > 2. As stated in the Introduction of the draft, link layer > broadcast can be accomplished using iterated unicast. > 3. If the flooded packet is sent reliably to all neighbors using > ACKs with retransmissions, then the first transmission from > node 2 (resp. 3) might be received only by node 5 (resp. 6). >=20 > Regards, > Richard >=20 > P.S. Regarding the terms "reflood" and "retransmit". >=20 > "Reflood" means to flood the packet again to all nodes. > RFC 2328 for OSPF uses this term correctly, but some > people have recently used it to mean "relay". >=20 > "Retransmit" means for the same node to transmit the packet again, > usually because an ACK was not received. > It will be very confusing when we talk about reliable flooding > with ACKs, if we use the word "retransmit" to mean both > retransmission from the same node, and relaying a packet > received from another node. >=20 > When talking about a node relaying a packet, I suggest using > either the term "relay" or "transmit". >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 11:49:34 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29070 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:49:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfk1-0005Lw-Dn for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:49:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1OGn5eb020570 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:49:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfk1-0005Lh-3r for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:49:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29032 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:49:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfjz-00013g-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:49:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfj3-0000xL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:48:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfi9-0000rU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:47:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfi2-00050v-2F; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:47:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfh7-0004rl-Dv for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:46:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28931 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:46:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfh6-0000lI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:46:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfg5-0000f7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:45:02 -0500 Received: from cartero2.sci.uma.es ([150.214.40.6]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvffC-0000VN-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:44:06 -0500 Received: from correo2.uma.es (vesta2.sci.uma.es [150.214.40.7]) by cartero2.sci.uma.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016F023DDB for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 17:43:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from pc116te.dte.uma.es (atmpc116.dte.uma.es [150.214.59.116]) by correo2.uma.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id B110C5D62E for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 17:43:33 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040224174216.02c81c18@buzonpdi.uma.es> X-Sender: atc@buzonpdi.uma.es X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 17:43:35 +0100 To: manet@ietf.org From: Alicia =?iso-8859-1?Q?Trivi=F1o?= Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] Real Implementation Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Where could I find the results of any real implementation of an ad hoc= network? Thanks in advance Alicia Trivi=F1o / Tl. +34-95.213.28.44 Dpto. Tecnologia Electronica E.T.S. Ing. Telecomunicacion Universidad de Malaga Campus Universitario de Teatinos 29071 Malaga, Spain _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 12:00:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29408 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:00:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfui-00067g-5Q for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:00:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1OH08gg023521 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:00:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfuh-00067E-FE for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:00:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29360 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:00:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfug-0002CT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:00:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfti-000252-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:59:07 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfsn-0001yV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:58:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfsf-0005kv-MP; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:58:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avfs1-0005je-UR for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:57:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29301 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:57:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avfs0-0001tl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:57:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvfrG-0001nj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:56:34 -0500 Received: from stamps.cs.ucsb.edu ([128.111.41.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvfqX-0001fy-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:55:49 -0500 Received: from kenai.cs.ucsb.edu (csil.cs.ucsb.edu [128.111.41.12]) by stamps.cs.ucsb.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1OGqZeL021241; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:52:35 -0800 (PST) From: Ian Chakeres MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <16443.33288.962231.949544@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:55:36 -0800 To: Alicia =?iso-8859-1?Q?Trivi=F1o?= Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE:[manet] Real Implementation In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040224174216.02c81c18@buzonpdi.uma.es> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040224174216.02c81c18@buzonpdi.uma.es> X-Mailer: VM 7.15 under Emacs 21.3.1 Reply-To: idc@cs.ucsb.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We have a few papers regarding real implementation results. They are available at http://moment.cs.ucsb.edu/publications In particular "The Utility of Hello Messages for Determining Link Connectivity." and "Report on the AODV Interop." I also recommend you check out http://user.it.uu.se/~henrikl/aodv/ Ian Chakeres >Alicia Trivi=F1o wrote: >Where could I find the results of any real implementation of an ad hoc= network? >Thanks in advance > >Alicia Trivi=F1o / Tl. +34-95.213.28.44 >Dpto. Tecnologia Electronica >E.T.S. Ing. Telecomunicacion >Universidad de Malaga >Campus Universitario de Teatinos >29071 Malaga, Spain > > > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 12:55:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA01420 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:55:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avglz-0002cB-B8 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:55:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1OHtBUF010050 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:55:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avglz-0002c1-7e for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:55:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA01393 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:55:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avglx-0007lb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:55:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avgl3-0007g7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:54:13 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avgk8-0007bZ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:53:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avgju-0002Fq-33; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:53:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avgj9-0002AO-Km for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:52:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA01294 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:52:12 -0500 (EST) From: richard.r.herron@L-3com.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avgj7-0007Vh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:52:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avgi4-0007QS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:51:08 -0500 Received: from slxcg01.csw.l-3com.com ([128.170.12.150]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvghJ-0007Gu-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:50:22 -0500 Received: by slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <1W5Y7T8F>; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 10:49:50 -0700 Message-ID: <31892CFAF4097F488320D5FFDC60074001A1C697@slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com> To: manet@ietf.org Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 10:49:49 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [manet] Very basic questions Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello all, I have some very basic questions about routing in MANETs. I have some experience with IPv4 routing in fixed systems which may be causing me some confusion when it comes to MANETs. My stick figure below is intended to represent two systems, X and Y. Each system has an Ethernet LAN interface and a Wireless interface. The Ethernet LAN on system X is subnet A, the wireless interface has an address on subnet B. The Ethernet LAN on system Y is subnet D, the wireless interface has an address on subnet C. B C V V | | ------- | | ------- D A | |-- --| |__ _|_ _|_ _ _ _|_ _|_ __| X | | Y | | | | | | | | | | | ------- ------- I don't see how systems X and Y can communicate over the wireless interfaces unless these interfaces are on the same subnet. Furthermore, if a similar system, Z, moves into the area how can it communicate unless its wireless interface is also on the same subnet? I have read that in a MANET the address is tied to the device not a topological location and that subnets don't really have a meaning in a MANET. Does this mean that the wireless interfaces all have vastly different IP addresses and can be arbitrarily assigned? What would the route table entry on system X look like to route a packet to system Y? What would the route entry on system X look like in order to route packets to a system on Ethernet LAN D attached to system Y? Finally, do the answers depend on which MANET protocol is being used? I have read several papers about DSR, AODV and OLSR and I am still missing this concept. I would greatly appreciate any help this group can give. Thanks, Richard Herron L-3 Communications _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 15:13:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08321 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvivX-0004Uz-Nw for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1OKDBGH017287 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvivX-0004Ug-Jj for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08257 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvivW-0005Ig-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:13:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AviuY-0005B2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:12:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avitc-00051Z-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:11:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvitU-0003cd-UY; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:11:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvitA-0003W6-Dd for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:10:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA07896 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:10:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avit7-0004vX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:10:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvisE-0004kB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:09:47 -0500 Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com ([130.76.64.48]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aviqq-0004Te-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:08:20 -0500 Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com ([129.172.13.4]) by slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id MAA16798; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:08:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from stl-hub-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/MBS-AV-02) with ESMTP id MAA08583; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:08:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from xch-nebh-01.ne.nos.boeing.com (xch-nebh-01.ne.nos.boeing.com [128.225.80.200]) by stl-hub-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i1OK6xn18464; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 14:06:59 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NE-02.ne.nos.boeing.com ([128.225.80.202]) by xch-nebh-01.ne.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6662); Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:06:59 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [manet] Very basic questions Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:06:58 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [manet] Very basic questions Thread-Index: AcP6/10c0PsUlnSxTlCP0QPyBka+agADziWA From: "Manfredi, Albert E" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2004 20:06:59.0275 (UTC) FILETIME=[C280E9B0:01C3FB11] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Finally, do the answers depend on which MANET protocol is > being used? Yes. One way of implementing a MANET is to make an IP router of every single = node. As they move about, their routing tables change. But each node can = indeed be its own IP subnet. Other schemes instead create IP subnets of individual MANETs, and = implement a way to autoconfigure the hosts' IP addresses accordingly, = perhaps as a function of the router that ties these to the fixed = Internet. However a common theme in MANET is that every (mobile) node = must participate or potentially participate in providing the network = infrastructure. The idea being that there is no fixed infrastructure to = provide connectivity to all these mobile hosts. They have to do it on = their own. Because reachability depends on defining hops across other mobile hosts, = some schemes specify which subset of nodes should be the ones to flood = routing information, just to keep the background traffic level under = control. The density and the level of mobility of mobile hosts will = determine which of the many protocols is best suited to any scenario. Your figure does not necessarily represent a MANET. Wireless access = points, e.g. IEEE 802.11, can simply be Link Layers of a fixed IP = infrastructure. The wireless access points can either be part of a = bigger link layer network (catenet), or they can each have a router = associated with them, but from the IP standpoint, really nothing new. = Any mobility of hosts would consist of finding a new access point and = using DHCP to obtain a new IP address. The infrastructure may be = stationary. Bert > -----Original Message----- > From: richard.r.herron@L-3com.com [mailto:richard.r.herron@L-3com.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 12:50 PM > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] Very basic questions >=20 >=20 > Hello all, >=20 > I have some very basic questions about routing in MANETs.=20 > I have some experience with IPv4 routing in fixed systems > which may be causing me some confusion when it comes to MANETs. >=20 > My stick figure below is intended to represent two systems, > X and Y. Each system has an Ethernet LAN interface and=20 > a Wireless interface. =20 >=20 > The Ethernet LAN on system X is subnet A, the wireless > interface has an address on subnet B. >=20 > The Ethernet LAN on system Y is subnet D, the wireless > interface has an address on subnet C. >=20 > B C =20 > =20 > V V > | | > ------- | | ------- D > A | |-- --| |__ _|_ _|_ _ > _ _|_ _|_ __| X | | Y | | | | > | | | | | | | > ------- ------- >=20 > I don't see how systems X and Y can communicate over the=20 > wireless interfaces unless these interfaces are on the same > subnet. Furthermore, if a similar system, Z, moves into the > area how can it communicate unless its wireless interface is > also on the same subnet? >=20 > I have read that in a MANET the address is tied to the device > not a topological location and that subnets don't really have > a meaning in a MANET. Does this mean that the wireless > interfaces all have vastly different IP addresses and can be > arbitrarily assigned? >=20 > What would the route table entry on system X look like > to route a packet to system Y? What would the route entry > on system X look like in order to route packets to a > system on Ethernet LAN D attached to system Y? >=20 > Finally, do the answers depend on which MANET protocol is > being used? >=20 > I have read several papers about DSR, AODV and OLSR and I am > still missing this concept. =20 >=20 > I would greatly appreciate any help this group can give. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Richard Herron > L-3 Communications >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Feb 24 21:52:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA23259 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:52:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avp97-00032J-Tq for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:51:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1P2pbmV011670 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:51:37 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avp97-000327-Ai for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:51:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA23254 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:51:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avp94-0007PC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:51:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avp7z-0007Kb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:50:28 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avp7p-0007GS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:50:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avp7b-0002o7-Qj; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:50:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avp6z-0002mu-Ru for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:49:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA23205 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:49:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avp6w-0007Fl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:49:23 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avp63-0007CD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:48:28 -0500 Received: from primary.vmtllc.com ([65.111.95.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avp5V-000784-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:47:53 -0500 Received: from Mercury (h-66-167-235-232.MCLNVA23.dynamic.covad.net [66.167.235.232]) by primary.vmtllc.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1P2ljY29378 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:47:46 -0500 From: "David Holmer" To: Subject: RE: [manet] strong interfering signals Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:47:45 -0500 Organization: Johns Hopkins University Message-ID: <008601c3fb49$c6167210$9adcdc80@Mercury> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I would say that X would probably not be able to successfully receive the packet from Z. The reason has to do with the state the MAC protocol is in when the interference begins. In your example Y has already started sending to X, so X has detected a valid preamble and start symbol on the medium. It probably has even decoded the MAC header which tells it how long the packet is. As a result X may not even be able to tell that Z is transmitting (and interfering with the packet from Y) until it tries to verify the frame check sequence and fails. By this time Z has probably transmitted much of the packet, and the only thing X would be able to do is carrier sense an ongoing transmission and back off till it was over. This is because X would have missed the preamble and start symbol of Z's transmission and thus can't lock its radio in to receive Z's packet. One caveat: I think it may be possible that Z's transmission may be strong enough to cause X to loose synchronization with Y's transmission and terminate the reception early (this is the cause of truncated packets). There is some small chance if this happens quickly enough, that X may have enough time to lock on to Z's preamble before the start symbol, and then be able to receive Z's transmission. However, I believe this is very unlikely. As implemented in NS2, X will not receive Z's packet regardless of the strength. One slight inaccuracy in the simulation occurs if Z and Y send their packets at almost the same time to X. In real life, even if the Y's packet starts to reach X a few microseconds before Z's packet (i.e. due to propagation delays and timing jitter), Z's packet will still be successfully received by X because it is so much stronger than the interfering signal (and thus X can lock on and receive the whole packet). However as simulated in NS2, neither packet will be received as Z is treated as colliding with an "ongoing" transmission from Y. PS. Does anyone else have any comments or experience about the mechanisms of synchronization loss and its effects on receiving packets? - David Holmer -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sundar K Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 5:10 PM To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] strong interfering signals Hi, Could anyone clarify on the following scenario in a MANET: Assume that a node X is receiving a data packet from node Y. Assume that in the meantime, node Z (in the near vicinity of X) initiates transmission to node X. I understand that with the CSThreshold being below the RxThreshold in 802.11, such a situation may not be likely. However, assuming that a situation as this occurs, node X would fail be able to recieve Y's packet successfully. Now, if the signal strength of the interfering signal from Z is sufficiently strong at X, would X be able to receive the packet from Z, successfully ? thanks in advance, sundar _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 00:00:20 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA27116 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:00:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avr9C-0001hU-MY for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:59:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1P4xoPA006535 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:59:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avr9C-0001hK-Ec for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:59:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA27094 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:59:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avr9A-0002Iv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:59:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avr85-0002Bt-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:58:41 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avr7d-000263-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:58:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avr7R-0001Qy-Et; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:58:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avr6z-0001Po-Ir for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:57:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA26968 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:57:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avr6x-00024C-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:57:31 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avr61-0001zi-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:56:33 -0500 Received: from pec.etri.re.kr ([129.254.114.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avr5U-0001tq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:56:00 -0500 Received: from paulnb (paul3.etri.re.kr [129.254.112.196]) by pec.etri.re.kr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i1P5BkfM007000; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:11:47 +0900 (KST) Message-ID: <004201c3fb5b$6ab10e50$c470fe81@etri.re.kr> From: "Jaehoon Paul Jeong" To: , "Joe Macker" Cc: , References: <2C2888A2C0D0BA46BF4EB97CE7A62E13010B42@cms2.cms.etri.re.kr> Subject: Re: [manet] Agenda Item Request Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:54:13 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003F_01C3FBA6.D9AD6BF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FORGED_OUTLOOK_TAGS, MIME_BASE64_LATIN,MIME_BASE64_TEXT autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01C3FBA6.D9AD6BF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UmU6IFttYW5ldF0gQWdlbmRhIEl0ZW0gUmVxdWVzdERlYXIgTUFORVQgQ2hhaXJzLA0KDQpGaXJz dCBvZiBhbGwsIHRoYW5rcyBmb3IgYSB0aW1lc2xvdCBmb3IgZGlzY3Vzc2luZyBNQU5FVCBBZGRy ZXNzIEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uIElzc3Vlcy4NCg0KSSBhbSB3b25kZXJpbmcgaWYgTUFORVQg RE5TIGNhbiBiZSBhIGNhbmRpZGF0ZSBvZiBNQU5FVCBuZXh0IHN0ZXBzLg0KV2hlbiB3ZSB0aGlu ayBNQU5FVCBhZGRyZXNzIGF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uIGFuZCBJbnRlcm5ldCBjb25uZWN0aXZp dHksDQpNQU5FVCBETlMgaGFzIGEgY2xvc2UgcmVsYXRpb25zaGlwIHdpdGggdGhlbS4NCk15IGRy YWZ0LCBkcmFmdC1qZW9uZy1tYW5ldC1kbnMtc2VydmljZS0wMC50eHQsIGRlYWxzIHdpdGggdGhl IGNvb3BlcmF0aW9uIHdpdGggdGhlIGFib3ZlIGZ1bmN0aW9ucy4NCkFsc28sIGluIHRoZSBhc3Bl Y3Qgb2YgbWFuZXQgZGVwbG95bWVudCBhbmQgYXBwbGljYXRpb24sIEROUyBzZWVtcyB0byBiZSBp bmRpc3BlbnNhYmxlLg0KDQpXaGVuIGNvbnNpZGVyaW5nIE1BTkVUIGNoYXJhY3RlcmlzdGljcywg d2UgbmVlZCB0byByZWR1Y2UgdGhlIGFtb3VudCBvZiBicm9hZGNhc3QgbWVzc2FnZXMNCmFuZCBk ZWxheSBpbiBETlMsIFNlcnZpY2UgRGlzY292ZXJ5LCBQMlAsIGV0Yy4NClRoZXNlIGFwcGxpY2F0 aW9ucyBhcmUgaW5jbGluZWQgdG8gc2VuZCByZXF1ZXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgaW4gYnJvYWRjYXN0IGFu ZCB0aGUgcmVzcG9uc2UgaXMgdW5pY2FzdCBieSBhIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRlbnQgbm9kZS4NCkVzcGVj aWFsbHksIGluIHJlYWN0aXZlIHJvdXRpbmcgcHJvdG9jb2xzLCBzdWNoIGFzIEFPRFYsIGlmIHRo ZSByZXF1ZXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgaXMgcGlnZ3liYWNrZWQgYnkgUlJFUSBtZXNzYWdlLA0KaXQgd2ls bCBiZSBiZW5lZmljaWFsIGR1ZSB0byB0aGUgcmV2ZXJzZSBwYXRoIGZvciBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIG1l c3NhZ2UuDQpUaGVyZWZvcmUsIE1BTkVUIEROUyBpcyBjbG9zZWx5IHJlbGF0ZWQgdG8gTUFORVQg cm91dGluZy4NCg0KSSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIGtub3cgeW91ciBvcGluaW9ucyBvbiBNQU5FVCBE TlMuDQpEbyB5b3UgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCBNQU5FVCBETlMgaXMgbWFuZXQgbmV4dCBpdGVtIG9yIG91 dCBvZiBzY29wZT8NClRoYW5rcy4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywNCkphZWhvb24gUGF1bCBKZW9uZw0KICAt LS0tLSBPcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlIC0tLS0tIA0KICBGcm9tOiBraGpAZXRyaS5yZS5rciANCiAg VG86IENvcnNvbkBmbGFyaW9uLmNvbSANCiAgQ2M6IG1hbmV0QGlldGYub3JnIDsgYXV0b25ldEBp cHY2Lm9yLmtyIA0KICBTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDE4LCAyMDA0IDEwOjM5IEFN DQogIFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbbWFuZXRdIEFnZW5kYSBJdGVtIFJlcXVlc3QNCg0KDQogIERlYXIg U2NvdHQsIA0KDQogIEknbSBpbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIHByZXNlbnRpbmcgYSBkcmFmdCB0aXRsZWQg IkROUyBTZXJ2aWNlIGZvciBNb2JpbGUgQWQgSG9jIE5ldHdvcmtzIjsgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9pbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHMvZHJhZnQtamVvbmctbWFuZXQtZG5zLXNlcnZpY2UtMDAudHh0 DQoNCiAgVGhpcyBkcmFmdCBkZWFscyB3aXRoIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdGhpbmdzOyANCiAgICAt IEROUyBTZXJ2aWNlIHdpdGhpbiBhIHN0YW5kLWFsb25lIE1BTkVUIA0KICAgIC0gRE5TIFNlcnZp Y2Ugd2l0aGluIGEgTUFORVQgY29ubmVjdGVkIHRvIHRoZSBJbnRlcm5ldCANCiAgICAtIFNlcnZp Y2UgRGlzY292ZXJ5IGJhc2VkIG9uIE11bHRpY2FzdCBETlMgDQogICAgLSBJbnRlcndvcmtpbmcg YmV0d2VlbiBNdWx0aWNhc3QgRE5TIGFuZCBJUCBBZGRyZXNzIEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uIA0K ICAgIC0gQXV0aGVudGljYXRpb24gb2YgRE5TIE1lc3NhZ2VzIA0KICAgIC0gSVB2NiBDb25zaWRl cmF0aW9ucyANCg0KICBJIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8gZGlzY3VzcyB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IHdpdGggb3Ro ZXIgZXhwZXJ0cyBhdCB0aGlzIG1lZXRpbmcuIA0KICBUaGFua3MuIA0KDQogIEJlc3QgUmVnYXJk cywgDQogIC0tLSANCiAgSHlvdW5nSnVuIEtJTShraGpAZXRyaS5yZS5rcikgDQogIERpcmVjdG9y L0lQdjYgRm9ydW0gS29yZWEsIA0KICBQcmluY2lwbGUgTWVtYmVyIG9mIFJlc2VhcmNoIFN0YWZm LCANCiAgSGVhZCBvZiBOR0kgU3RhbmRhcmRzIFJlYXNlcmNoIFRlYW0vIA0KICBQcm90b2NvbCBF bmdpbmVlcmluZyBDZW50ZXIvIA0KICBFbGVjdHJvbmljcyBhbmQgVGVsZWNvbW11bmljYXRpb25z IFJlc2VhcmNoIEluc3RpdHV0ZSANCiAgMTYxIEdhanVuZy1Eb25nLCBZdXN1bmctR3UsIFRhZWpv biwgMzA1LTM1MCwgUmVwLiBvZiBLT1JFQSANCiAgVGVsOiArODIgNDIgODYwIDY1NzYsIEZheDog KzgyIDQyIDg2MSA1NDA0IE1vYmlsZSBQaG9uZTogMDEwLTMwMzQtNjY1NSANCg== ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01C3FBA6.D9AD6BF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPjxUSVRMRT5SZTogW21hbmV0XSBBZ2VuZGEgSXRlbSBSZXF1ZXN0 PC9USVRMRT4NCjxNRVRBIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9Q29udGVudC1UeXBlIGNvbnRlbnQ9InRleHQvaHRt bDsgY2hhcnNldD13aW5kb3dzLTEyNTIiPg0KPE1FVEEgY29udGVudD0iTVNIVE1MIDYuMDAuMjgw MC4xNDAwIiBuYW1lPUdFTkVSQVRPUj4NCjxTVFlMRT48L1NUWUxFPg0KPC9IRUFEPg0KPEJPRFkg YmdDb2xvcj0jZmZmZmZmPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIHNpemU9Mj5EZWFyIE1BTkVU IENoYWlycyw8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9O VD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBzaXplPTI+Rmlyc3Qgb2YgYWxs LCB0aGFua3MgZm9yIGEmbmJzcDt0aW1lc2xvdCBmb3IgDQpkaXNjdXNzaW5nIE1BTkVUIEFkZHJl c3MgQXV0b2NvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24gSXNzdWVzLjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgZmFj ZT1BcmlhbCBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFs IHNpemU9Mj5JIGFtIHdvbmRlcmluZyBpZiBNQU5FVCBETlMgY2FuIGJlIGEgY2FuZGlkYXRlIG9m IA0KTUFORVQgbmV4dCBzdGVwcy48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwg c2l6ZT0yPldoZW4gd2UgdGhpbmsgTUFORVQgYWRkcmVzcyBhdXRvY29uZmlndXJhdGlvbiBhbmQg DQpJbnRlcm5ldCBjb25uZWN0aXZpdHksPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFy aWFsIHNpemU9Mj5NQU5FVCBETlMgaGFzIGEgY2xvc2UgcmVsYXRpb25zaGlwIHdpdGggDQp0aGVt LjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPk15IGRy YWZ0LCA8QSANCmhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzL2RyYWZ0 LWplb25nLW1hbmV0LWRucy1zZXJ2aWNlLTAwLnR4dCI+ZHJhZnQtamVvbmctbWFuZXQtZG5zLXNl cnZpY2UtMDAudHh0PC9BPiwgDQpkZWFscyB3aXRoIHRoZSBjb29wZXJhdGlvbiB3aXRoIHRoZSBh Ym92ZSBmdW5jdGlvbnMuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIHNpemU9 Mj5BbHNvLCBpbiB0aGUgYXNwZWN0IG9mIG1hbmV0IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgYW5kIA0KYXBwbGljYXRp b24sIEROUyZuYnNwO3NlZW1zIHRvIGJlJm5ic3A7aW5kaXNwZW5zYWJsZS48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+ DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj48L0RJVj4N CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBzaXplPTI+V2hlbiBjb25zaWRlcmluZyZuYnNwO01BTkVU IGNoYXJhY3RlcmlzdGljcywgDQp3ZSZuYnNwO25lZWQgdG8mbmJzcDtyZWR1Y2UgdGhlIGFtb3Vu dCBvZiBicm9hZGNhc3QgbWVzc2FnZXM8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJp YWwgc2l6ZT0yPmFuZCZuYnNwO2RlbGF5IGluJm5ic3A7RE5TLCBTZXJ2aWNlIERpc2NvdmVyeSwg UDJQLCANCmV0Yy48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPlRo ZXNlIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucyBhcmUgaW5jbGluZWQgdG8gc2VuZCByZXF1ZXN0IA0KbWVzc2FnZSBp biBicm9hZGNhc3QgYW5kIHRoZSByZXNwb25zZSBpcyB1bmljYXN0IGJ5IGEgY29ycmVzcG9uZGVu dCANCm5vZGUuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIHNpemU9Mj5Fc3Bl Y2lhbGx5LCBpbiByZWFjdGl2ZSByb3V0aW5nIHByb3RvY29scywgc3VjaCBhcyANCkFPRFYsIGlm IHRoZSByZXF1ZXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgaXMgcGlnZ3liYWNrZWQgYnkgUlJFUSBtZXNzYWdlLDwvRk9O VD48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBzaXplPTI+aXQmbmJzcDt3aWxsIGJlJm5i c3A7YmVuZWZpY2lhbCBkdWUgdG8gdGhlIHJldmVyc2UgDQpwYXRoIGZvciBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIG1l c3NhZ2UuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIHNpemU9Mj5UaGVyZWZv cmUsIE1BTkVUJm5ic3A7RE5TIGlzIGNsb3NlbHkgcmVsYXRlZCB0byANCk1BTkVUJm5ic3A7cm91 dGluZy48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9OVD4m bmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBzaXplPTI+SSZuYnNwO3dvdWxkIGxp a2UgdG8ga25vdyZuYnNwO3lvdXIgDQpvcGluaW9ucyZuYnNwO29uIE1BTkVUIEROUy48L0ZPTlQ+ PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPkRvIHlvdSB0aGluayB0aGF0IE1B TkVUIEROUyBpcyZuYnNwO21hbmV0IG5leHQgaXRlbSANCm9yIG91dCBvZiBzY29wZT88L0ZPTlQ+ PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPlRoYW5rcy48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+ DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+ PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBzaXplPTI+UmVnYXJkcyw8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05U IGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgc2l6ZT0yPkphZWhvb24gUGF1bCBKZW9uZzwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4NCjxCTE9D S1FVT1RFIGRpcj1sdHIgDQpzdHlsZT0iUEFERElORy1SSUdIVDogMHB4OyBQQURESU5HLUxFRlQ6 IDVweDsgTUFSR0lOLUxFRlQ6IDVweDsgQk9SREVSLUxFRlQ6ICMwMDAwMDAgMnB4IHNvbGlkOyBN QVJHSU4tUklHSFQ6IDBweCI+DQogIDxESVYgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQ6IDEwcHQgJiM0NDQwNDsmIzQ3 NTQ4OyI+LS0tLS0gT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZSAtLS0tLSA8L0RJVj4NCiAgPERJViANCiAgc3R5 bGU9IkJBQ0tHUk9VTkQ6ICNlNGU0ZTQ7IEZPTlQ6IDEwcHQgJiM0NDQwNDsmIzQ3NTQ4OzsgZm9u dC1jb2xvcjogYmxhY2siPjxCPkZyb206PC9CPiA8QSANCiAgdGl0bGU9a2hqQGV0cmkucmUua3Ig aHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmtoakBldHJpLnJlLmtyIj5raGpAZXRyaS5yZS5rcjwvQT4gPC9ESVY+DQog IDxESVYgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQ6IDEwcHQgJiM0NDQwNDsmIzQ3NTQ4OyI+PEI+VG86PC9CPiA8QSB0 aXRsZT1Db3Jzb25AZmxhcmlvbi5jb20gDQogIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpDb3Jzb25AZmxhcmlvbi5j b20iPkNvcnNvbkBmbGFyaW9uLmNvbTwvQT4gPC9ESVY+DQogIDxESVYgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQ6IDEw cHQgJiM0NDQwNDsmIzQ3NTQ4OyI+PEI+Q2M6PC9CPiA8QSB0aXRsZT1tYW5ldEBpZXRmLm9yZyAN CiAgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm1hbmV0QGlldGYub3JnIj5tYW5ldEBpZXRmLm9yZzwvQT4gOyA8QSB0 aXRsZT1hdXRvbmV0QGlwdjYub3Iua3IgDQogIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzphdXRvbmV0QGlwdjYub3Iu a3IiPmF1dG9uZXRAaXB2Ni5vci5rcjwvQT4gPC9ESVY+DQogIDxESVYgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQ6IDEw cHQgJiM0NDQwNDsmIzQ3NTQ4OyI+PEI+U2VudDo8L0I+IFdlZG5lc2RheSwgRmVicnVhcnkgMTgs IDIwMDQgMTA6MzkgDQogIEFNPC9ESVY+DQogIDxESVYgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQ6IDEwcHQgJiM0NDQw NDsmIzQ3NTQ4OyI+PEI+U3ViamVjdDo8L0I+IFJlOiBbbWFuZXRdIEFnZW5kYSBJdGVtIA0KICBS ZXF1ZXN0PC9ESVY+DQogIDxESVY+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT0mIzQ0NDA0OyYjNDc1NDg7IHNpemU9Mj48 L0ZPTlQ+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT0mIzQ0NDA0OyYjNDc1NDg7IHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+PEJSPjwvRElW Pg0KICA8UD48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+RGVhciBTY290dCw8L0ZPTlQ+IDwvUD4NCiAgPFA+PEZPTlQg c2l6ZT0yPkknbSBpbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIHByZXNlbnRpbmcgYSBkcmFmdCB0aXRsZWQgIkROUyBT ZXJ2aWNlIGZvciANCiAgTW9iaWxlIEFkIEhvYyBOZXR3b3JrcyI7IDxBIA0KICBocmVmPSJodHRw Oi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0cy9kcmFmdC1qZW9uZy1tYW5ldC1kbnMtc2Vy dmljZS0wMC50eHQiIA0KICB0YXJnZXQ9X2JsYW5rPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaW50ZXJu ZXQtZHJhZnRzL2RyYWZ0LWplb25nLW1hbmV0LWRucy1zZXJ2aWNlLTAwLnR4dDwvQT48L0ZPTlQ+ PC9QPg0KICA8UD48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+VGhpcyBkcmFmdCBkZWFscyB3aXRoIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dp bmcgdGhpbmdzOzwvRk9OVD4gPEJSPjxGT05UIA0KICBzaXplPTI+Jm5ic3A7IC0gRE5TIFNlcnZp Y2Ugd2l0aGluIGEgc3RhbmQtYWxvbmUgTUFORVQ8L0ZPTlQ+IDxCUj48Rk9OVCANCiAgc2l6ZT0y PiZuYnNwOyAtIEROUyBTZXJ2aWNlIHdpdGhpbiBhIE1BTkVUIGNvbm5lY3RlZCB0byB0aGUgSW50 ZXJuZXQ8L0ZPTlQ+IA0KICA8QlI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPiZuYnNwOyAtIFNlcnZpY2UgRGlzY292 ZXJ5IGJhc2VkIG9uIE11bHRpY2FzdCBETlM8L0ZPTlQ+IA0KICA8QlI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPiZu YnNwOyAtIEludGVyd29ya2luZyBiZXR3ZWVuIE11bHRpY2FzdCBETlMgYW5kIElQIEFkZHJlc3Mg DQogIEF1dG9jb25maWd1cmF0aW9uPC9GT05UPiA8QlI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPiZuYnNwOyAtIEF1 dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIG9mIEROUyANCiAgTWVzc2FnZXM8L0ZPTlQ+IDxCUj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+ Jm5ic3A7IC0gSVB2NiBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9uczwvRk9OVD4gPC9QPg0KICA8UD48Rk9OVCBzaXpl PTI+SSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIGRpc2N1c3MgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCB3aXRoIG90aGVyIGV4cGVydHMg YXQgdGhpcyANCiAgbWVldGluZy48L0ZPTlQ+IDxCUj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+VGhhbmtzLjwvRk9O VD4gPC9QPg0KICA8UD48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+QmVzdCBSZWdhcmRzLDwvRk9OVD4gPEJSPjxGT05U IHNpemU9Mj4tLS08L0ZPTlQ+IDxCUj48Rk9OVCANCiAgc2l6ZT0yPkh5b3VuZ0p1biBLSU0oa2hq QGV0cmkucmUua3IpPC9GT05UPiA8QlI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPkRpcmVjdG9yL0lQdjYgDQogIEZv cnVtIEtvcmVhLDwvRk9OVD4gPEJSPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5QcmluY2lwbGUgTWVtYmVyIG9mIFJl c2VhcmNoIA0KICBTdGFmZiw8L0ZPTlQ+IDxCUj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+SGVhZCBvZiBOR0kgU3Rh bmRhcmRzIFJlYXNlcmNoIFRlYW0vPC9GT05UPiANCiAgPEJSPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5Qcm90b2Nv bCBFbmdpbmVlcmluZyBDZW50ZXIvPC9GT05UPiA8QlI+PEZPTlQgDQogIHNpemU9Mj5FbGVjdHJv bmljcyBhbmQgVGVsZWNvbW11bmljYXRpb25zIFJlc2VhcmNoIEluc3RpdHV0ZTwvRk9OVD4gPEJS PjxGT05UIA0KICBzaXplPTI+MTYxIEdhanVuZy1Eb25nLCBZdXN1bmctR3UsIFRhZWpvbiwgMzA1 LTM1MCwgUmVwLiBvZiBLT1JFQTwvRk9OVD4gDQogIDxCUj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+VGVsOiArODIg NDIgODYwIDY1NzYsIEZheDogKzgyIDQyIDg2MSA1NDA0IE1vYmlsZSBQaG9uZTogDQogIDAxMC0z MDM0LTY2NTU8L0ZPTlQ+IDwvUD48L0JMT0NLUVVPVEU+PC9CT0RZPjwvSFRNTD4NCg== ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01C3FBA6.D9AD6BF0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 01:34:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA00442 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:34:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avsc8-0000JU-PK for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:33:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1P6Xm21001203 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:33:48 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avsc8-0000JK-LM for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:33:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA00425 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:33:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avsc5-000330-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:33:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avsb9-0002wC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:32:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvsaV-0002pb-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:32:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvsaQ-0008RA-T1; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:32:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvsZv-0008Pq-FN for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:31:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA00285 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:31:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvsZs-0002mR-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:31:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvsYu-0002fn-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:30:29 -0500 Received: from rodin.i2r.a-star.edu.sg ([192.122.139.27] helo=i2r.a-star.edu.sg) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvsXx-0002WS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:29:30 -0500 Received: from newmailhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by i2r.a-star.edu.sg (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1P6SU7o010845 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:28:30 +0800 (SGT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([192.168.152.135]) by mailhost.lit.org.sg (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 1 (built Aug 19 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HTM000CFNBQW4@mailhost.lit.org.sg> for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:28:38 +0800 (SGT) Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 07F7E352D4; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:29:15 +0800 (SGT) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:29:15 +0800 From: "Sukanta K. Hazra" Subject: Re: [manet] Very basic questions In-reply-to: <31892CFAF4097F488320D5FFDC60074001A1C697@slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com> To: richard.r.herron@L-3com.com Cc: manet@ietf.org Mail-followup-to: richard.r.herron@L-3com.com, manet@ietf.org Message-id: <20040225062914.GA24088@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> Organization: Institute for Infocomm Research MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline PGP-ID: 0x8E084AD5 Key-Fingerprint: 9C0D B00C C62A 7059 5314 99FC CE90 478A 8E08 4AD5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i References: <31892CFAF4097F488320D5FFDC60074001A1C697@slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hi Richard, Most MANET routing protocols use host based routing, each node's routing table keeps an entry to a host. On the other hand in traditional IP routing, the nodes have routing table have entries to networks. That is where the subnet concept comes into play, its a mean of aggregation. Regards, Sukanta ----- Original Message ----- From: "richard.r.herron@L-3com.com" Date: Wed, 25 Feb, 2004 01:49 SGT Subject: [manet] Very basic questions > Hello all, > > I have some very basic questions about routing in MANETs. > I have some experience with IPv4 routing in fixed systems > which may be causing me some confusion when it comes to MANETs. > > My stick figure below is intended to represent two systems, > X and Y. Each system has an Ethernet LAN interface and > a Wireless interface. > > The Ethernet LAN on system X is subnet A, the wireless > interface has an address on subnet B. > > The Ethernet LAN on system Y is subnet D, the wireless > interface has an address on subnet C. > > B C > > V V > | | > ------- | | ------- D > A | |-- --| |__ _|_ _|_ _ > _ _|_ _|_ __| X | | Y | | | | > | | | | | | | > ------- ------- > > I don't see how systems X and Y can communicate over the > wireless interfaces unless these interfaces are on the same > subnet. Furthermore, if a similar system, Z, moves into the > area how can it communicate unless its wireless interface is > also on the same subnet? > > I have read that in a MANET the address is tied to the device > not a topological location and that subnets don't really have > a meaning in a MANET. Does this mean that the wireless > interfaces all have vastly different IP addresses and can be > arbitrarily assigned? > > What would the route table entry on system X look like > to route a packet to system Y? What would the route entry > on system X look like in order to route packets to a > system on Ethernet LAN D attached to system Y? > > Finally, do the answers depend on which MANET protocol is > being used? > > I have read several papers about DSR, AODV and OLSR and I am > still missing this concept. > > I would greatly appreciate any help this group can give. > > Thanks, > > Richard Herron > L-3 Communications > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet -- Sukanta K. Hazra (Mr.) Institute for Infocomm Research Tel: +65 6874-1953 Fax: +65 6776-8109 Homepage: http://www1.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/~sukanta/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 05:14:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA08314 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:14:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avw30-0001Ks-6q for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:13:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PADknY005133 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:13:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avw2z-0001Kg-Km for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:13:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA08301 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:13:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avw2w-000430-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:13:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avw22-0003y9-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:12:49 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avw1d-0003tB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:12:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avw1P-00012m-58; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:12:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avw13-00012M-Gv for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:11:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA08246 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:11:42 -0500 (EST) From: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avw10-0003rD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:11:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avw0B-0003mM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:10:53 -0500 Received: from virus-out.ttyl.com ([193.212.240.200] helo=virus-out-st.online.no) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvvzW-0003dK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:10:10 -0500 Received: from tns-fbu-22-209.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.162.190] [134.47.162.190]) by scan.telenor.net with ESMTP; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:09:22 +0100 Received: from tns-fbu-22-213.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.162.191]) by tns-fbu-22-209.corp.telenor.no with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:09:21 +0100 Received: from tns-fbu-2e-004.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.163.65]) by tns-fbu-22-213.corp.telenor.no with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:09:21 +0100 content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:09:20 +0100 Message-Id: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A5@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> Thread-Topic: [manet] Agenda Item Request Thread-Index: AcP7XCMJ/T1TmzWnR263ekNQT47ZIQAJWDIQ To: Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2004 10:09:21.0174 (UTC) FILETIME=[6FD2AB60:01C3FB87] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C3FB87.6FA87992" Subject: [manet] Differences from draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt ? (WAS: Agenda Item Request) Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_20_30, HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3FB87.6FA87992 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Paul, =20 When I read your address resolution draft that you submitted last year, = I spent much time to figure out which aspects differed from the draft by = Perkins (draft-perkins-manet-autoconfig-01.txt) which was well known to = me. (See for example: = http://genie.iitd.ernet.in/~bnj/CS858-Fall-2003-04-GENIE/PapersandRFCs-Ad= hocNetworks/draft-perkins-manet-autoconf-01.txt) I wish you had = explained clearly in your draft the differences between the two = approaches. Your key-based twist to address autoconfiguration could have = been summarized in half a page. The rest was re-invention of the wheel. = A short comparitive summary could have saved me (and probably many of = us) much time. =20 Again, I have the same problem. DNS name resolution for MANETs was = presented at IETF in Vienna last summer, and we discussed the approach = after the meeting. You have recently submitted an alternative approach = to name resolution, but after having skimmed through your 11-page draft, = I realize I need more time to figure out the main differences. Could you = do me the favour of shortly summarizing the main differences between our = two approaches? =20 Thank you, Paal --------------------------------------------- I assume that your already read our draft, but here is a pointer, just = in case: =20 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. Title : Name Resolution in on-demand MANETS and external IP Networks Author(s) : P. Engelstad, G. Egeland, R. Koodli, C. Perkins Filename : draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2004-2-2 =09 The most common user applications for data communication (including=20 web browsing and e-mail) lack a method for name resolution in multi- hop wireless ad-hoc networks of mobile nodes (MANETs). While the=20 Domain Name System (DNS) works well on the fixed Internet, it=20 represents a centralized approach to name resolution, which is not=20 suitable for MANETs. This document specifies a straightforward=20 solution for name resolution lookup in on-demand MANETs, i.e. MANETs = that are routed with a reactive routing protocol, such as DSR [DSR]=20 or AODV [AODV]. Names are resolved locally within the MANET with a=20 mechanism similar to multicast DNS or LLMNR on a link. Although=20 names resolved locally normally will have preference, MANET nodes=20 that have access to external networks may complement the local name=20 resolution by injecting into the MANET lookup results resolved by a=20 conventional DNS server. The proposed solution applies equally well=20 to IPv4 or IPv6. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution= -01.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to=20 ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the = message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the = username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html=20 or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt". =09 NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. =09 =09 Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. = = =20 -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]P=E5 vegne av = Jaehoon Paul Jeong Sendt: 25. februar 2004 05:54 Til: Corson@flarion.com; Joe Macker Kopi: manet@ietf.org; autonet@ipv6.or.kr Emne: Re: [manet] Agenda Item Request Dear MANET Chairs, =20 First of all, thanks for a timeslot for discussing MANET Address = Autoconfiguration Issues. =20 I am wondering if MANET DNS can be a candidate of MANET next steps. When we think MANET address autoconfiguration and Internet connectivity, MANET DNS has a close relationship with them. My draft, draft-jeong-manet-dns-service-00.txt = , deals with the cooperation with the above functions. Also, in the aspect of manet deployment and application, DNS seems to be = indispensable. =20 When considering MANET characteristics, we need to reduce the amount of = broadcast messages and delay in DNS, Service Discovery, P2P, etc. These applications are inclined to send request message in broadcast and = the response is unicast by a correspondent node. Especially, in reactive routing protocols, such as AODV, if the request = message is piggybacked by RREQ message, it will be beneficial due to the reverse path for a response message. Therefore, MANET DNS is closely related to MANET routing. =20 I would like to know your opinions on MANET DNS. Do you think that MANET DNS is manet next item or out of scope? Thanks. =20 Regards, Jaehoon Paul Jeong ----- Original Message -----=20 From: khj@etri.re.kr=20 To: Corson@flarion.com=20 Cc: manet@ietf.org ; autonet@ipv6.or.kr=20 Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 10:39 AM Subject: Re: [manet] Agenda Item Request Dear Scott,=20 I'm interested in presenting a draft titled "DNS Service for Mobile Ad = Hoc Networks"; = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jeong-manet-dns-service-00.txt This draft deals with the following things;=20 - DNS Service within a stand-alone MANET=20 - DNS Service within a MANET connected to the Internet=20 - Service Discovery based on Multicast DNS=20 - Interworking between Multicast DNS and IP Address Autoconfiguration=20 - Authentication of DNS Messages=20 - IPv6 Considerations=20 I would like to discuss this draft with other experts at this meeting.=20 Thanks.=20 Best Regards,=20 ---=20 HyoungJun KIM(khj@etri.re.kr)=20 Director/IPv6 Forum Korea,=20 Principle Member of Research Staff,=20 Head of NGI Standards Reaserch Team/=20 Protocol Engineering Center/=20 Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute=20 161 Gajung-Dong, Yusung-Gu, Taejon, 305-350, Rep. of KOREA=20 Tel: +82 42 860 6576, Fax: +82 42 861 5404 Mobile Phone: 010-3034-6655=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3FB87.6FA87992 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [manet] Agenda Item Request
Hi=20 Paul,
 
When I=20 read your address resolution draft that you submitted last year, I spent = much=20 time to figure out which aspects differed from the draft by Perkins=20 (draft-perkins-manet-autoconfig-01.txt) which was well known to me. (See = for=20 example: http://genie.iit= d.ernet.in/~bnj/CS858-Fall-2003-04-GENIE/PapersandRFCs-AdhocNetworks/draf= t-perkins-manet-autoconf-01.txt)=20 I wish you had explained clearly in your draft the=20 differences between the two approaches. Your = key-based twist to=20 address autoconfiguration could have been summarized in half a = page. The=20 rest was re-invention of the wheel. A short comparitive summary = could have=20 saved me (and probably many of us) much time.
 
Again,=20 I have the same problem. DNS name resolution for MANETs was presented at = IETF in=20 Vienna last summer, and we discussed the approach after the meeting. You = have=20 recently submitted an alternative approach to name resolution, but after = having=20 skimmed through your 11-page draft, I realize I need more time to figure = out the=20 main differences. Could you do me the favour of shortly summarizing the = main=20 differences between our two approaches?
 
Thank=20 you,
Paal
---------------------------------------------
I=20 assume that your already read our draft, but here is a pointer, just in=20 case:
 
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line =
Internet-Drafts directories.


	Title		: Name Resolution in on-demand MANETS and external IP Networks
	Author(s)	: P. Engelstad, G. Egeland, =
R. Koodli, C. Perkins
	Filename	: draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt
	Pages		: 13
	Date		: 2004-2-2
=09
The most common user applications for data communication (including=20
    web browsing and e-mail) lack a method for name resolution in multi-
    hop wireless ad-hoc networks of mobile nodes (MANETs). While the=20
    Domain Name System (DNS) works well on the fixed Internet, it=20
    represents a centralized approach to name resolution, which is not=20
    suitable for MANETs. This document specifies a straightforward=20
    solution for name resolution lookup in on-demand MANETs, i.e. MANETs =

    that are routed with a reactive routing protocol, such as DSR [DSR]=20
    or AODV [AODV]. Names are resolved locally within the MANET with a=20
    mechanism similar to multicast DNS or LLMNR on a link. Although=20
    names resolved locally normally will have preference, MANET nodes=20
    that have access to external networks may complement the local name=20
    resolution by injecting into the MANET lookup results resolved by a=20
    conventional DNS server. The proposed solution applies equally well=20
    to IPv4 or IPv6.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-engelstad-mane=
t-name-resolution-01.txt

To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to=20
ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the =
message.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the =
username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html<=
/A>=20
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/iet=
f/1shadow-sites.txt


Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	mailserv@ietf.org.
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-engelstad-manet-name-resolution-01.txt".
=09
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.
	=09
	=09
Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
<ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-engelstad-ma= net-name-resolution-01.txt>=20
-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: = manet-admin@ietf.org=20 [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]P=E5 vegne av Jaehoon Paul=20 Jeong
Sendt: 25. februar 2004 05:54
Til:=20 Corson@flarion.com; Joe Macker
Kopi: manet@ietf.org;=20 autonet@ipv6.or.kr
Emne: Re: [manet] Agenda Item=20 Request

Dear MANET Chairs,
 
First of all, thanks for = a timeslot for=20 discussing MANET Address Autoconfiguration Issues.
 
I am wondering if MANET DNS can be a = candidate of=20 MANET next steps.
When we think MANET address = autoconfiguration and=20 Internet connectivity,
MANET DNS has a close relationship = with=20 them.
My draft, draft-jeong-manet-dns-service-00.txt,=20 deals with the cooperation with the above functions.
Also, in the aspect of manet = deployment and=20 application, DNS seems to be indispensable.
 
When considering MANET = characteristics,=20 we need to reduce the amount of broadcast = messages
and delay in DNS, Service = Discovery,=20 P2P, etc.
These applications are inclined to = send request=20 message in broadcast and the response is unicast by a correspondent=20 node.
Especially, in reactive routing = protocols, such=20 as AODV, if the request message is piggybacked by RREQ = message,
it will be beneficial due = to the=20 reverse path for a response message.
Therefore, MANET DNS is closely = related to=20 MANET routing.
 
I would like to know your=20 opinions on MANET DNS.
Do you think that MANET DNS = is manet next=20 item or out of scope?
Thanks.
 
Regards,
Jaehoon Paul Jeong
----- Original Message = -----
From:=20 khj@etri.re.kr=20
Cc: manet@ietf.org ; autonet@ipv6.or.kr
Sent: Wednesday, = February 18, 2004 10:39=20 AM
Subject: Re: = [manet] Agenda Item=20 Request

Dear Scott,

I'm interested in presenting a draft titled "DNS = Service for=20 Mobile Ad Hoc Networks"; http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jeong-manet-dns= -service-00.txt

This draft deals with the following things; =
  - DNS Service within a stand-alone MANET =
  - DNS Service within a MANET connected to the = Internet=20
  - Service Discovery based on Multicast = DNS=20
  - Interworking between Multicast DNS and = IP Address=20 Autoconfiguration
  - Authentication = of DNS=20 Messages
  - IPv6 = Considerations

I would like to discuss this draft with other = experts at=20 this meeting.
Thanks.

Best Regards,
--- =
HyoungJun KIM(khj@etri.re.kr)
Director/IPv6=20 Forum Korea,
Principle Member of Research=20 Staff,
Head of NGI Standards Reaserch = Team/=20
Protocol Engineering Center/
Electronics and Telecommunications Research = Institute=20
161 Gajung-Dong, Yusung-Gu, Taejon, 305-350, Rep. = of=20 KOREA
Tel: +82 42 860 6576, Fax: +82 42 = 861 5404=20 Mobile Phone: 010-3034-6655 =

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3FB87.6FA87992-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 05:55:28 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09894 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:55:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avwgu-0004je-S2 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:55:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PAt0pY018196 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:55:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avwgu-0004jP-NX for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:55:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09876 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:54:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwgr-00004h-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:54:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwfm-0007km-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:53:51 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwf7-0007eg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:53:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avwez-0004KE-5R; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:53:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avwee-0004JP-9N for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:52:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09803 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:52:36 -0500 (EST) From: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwea-0007cU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:52:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwdg-0007Xf-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:51:41 -0500 Received: from virus-out.ttyl.com ([193.212.240.200] helo=virus-out-st.online.no) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwcp-0007Ok-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:50:47 -0500 Received: from tns-fbu-22-208.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.162.90] [134.47.162.90]) by scan.telenor.net with ESMTP; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:50:16 +0100 Received: from tns-fbu-22-213.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.162.191]) by tns-fbu-22-208.corp.telenor.no with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:50:13 +0100 Received: from tns-fbu-2e-004.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.163.65]) by tns-fbu-22-213.corp.telenor.no with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:50:12 +0100 content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:50:12 +0100 Message-Id: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> Thread-Topic: ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) Thread-Index: AcP7jSMYC9RiTor2QACZWNqIfnHWzA== To: Cc: , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2004 10:50:12.0877 (UTC) FILETIME=[2526DBD0:01C3FB8D] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I did some GloMoSim simulations with AODV and experimented with the = setting of the ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value. For the scenarios that I = tested, I was surprised to see how little the performance degraded when = I chose very large timeout values. I have obviously done something wrong = - either not selected the right simulation scenarios or not measured the = right things. To help me on the way, could someone please tell me the most important = networking aspects that prohibits the choice of a large = ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT. What are the main trade-offs when setting this = value? Or could someone give me a pointer to relevant publications. Thanks, Paal _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 06:15:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA10673 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:15:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avx03-0006Ig-Ad for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:14:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PBElNL024212 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:14:47 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avx03-0006IR-5x for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:14:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA10649 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:14:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwzz-0001yr-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:14:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwz5-0001sa-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:13:48 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvwyV-0001nO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:13:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvwyL-0005mu-Hk; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:13:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avwy9-0005mP-9A for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:12:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA10581 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:12:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwy5-0001mo-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:12:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvwxI-0001he-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:11:57 -0500 Received: from cartero2.sci.uma.es ([150.214.40.6]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avwwu-0001aW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:11:32 -0500 Received: from correo2.uma.es (vesta2.sci.uma.es [150.214.40.7]) by cartero2.sci.uma.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id C881223D66 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:11:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from pc116te.dte.uma.es (atmpc116.dte.uma.es [150.214.59.116]) by correo2.uma.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EBAB5D62D for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:11:02 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040225120942.02c81460@buzonpdi.uma.es> X-Sender: atc@buzonpdi.uma.es X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:11:09 +0100 To: manet@ietf.org From: Alicia =?iso-8859-1?Q?Trivi=F1o?= Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [manet] Real movement traces Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Where could I found real movement traces of any implemented ad hoc network? Thanks. Alicia Trivi=F1o / Tl. +34-95.213.28.44 Dpto. Tecnologia Electronica E.T.S. Ing. Telecomunicacion Universidad de Malaga Campus Universitario de Teatinos 29071 Malaga, Spain _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 07:00:16 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA12115 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:00:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxhd-0001XL-SL for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:59:50 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PBxnhW005901 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:59:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxhd-0001X6-Kl for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:59:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA12074 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:59:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvxhZ-00066F-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:59:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxgd-0005zg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:58:48 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxfy-0005uC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:58:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxft-0000la-TS; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:58:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxfg-0000if-NW for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:57:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA12040 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:57:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxfc-0005t2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:57:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxei-0005oL-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:56:49 -0500 Received: from aun.it.uu.se ([130.238.12.36] ident=0) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvxeJ-0005jM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:56:23 -0500 Received: from [130.238.8.241] (dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se [130.238.8.241]) by aun.it.uu.se (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1PBuEUr023057; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:56:14 +0100 (MET) Subject: Re: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) From: Erik =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nordstr=F6m?= To: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Cc: manet@ietf.org, Charles.Perkins@nokia.com, ebelding@cs.ucsb.edu, sdas@ececs.uc.edu In-Reply-To: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> References: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1077710169.6384.1.camel@dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:56:09 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi, Isn't it the case that routes are often preempted by other events, such as link break (link layer feedback or HELLO messages), with the result that ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT doesn't really matter that much? //Erik On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 11:50, Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com wrote: > Hi, > > I did some GloMoSim simulations with AODV and experimented with the setting of the ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value. For the scenarios that I tested, I was surprised to see how little the performance degraded when I chose very large timeout values. I have obviously done something wrong - either not selected the right simulation scenarios or not measured the right things. > > To help me on the way, could someone please tell me the most important networking aspects that prohibits the choice of a large ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT. What are the main trade-offs when setting this value? Or could someone give me a pointer to relevant publications. > > Thanks, > Paal > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 07:18:15 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA12740 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:18:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxyx-00037U-3z for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:17:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PCHhMW011986 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:17:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxyw-00037F-Ua for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:17:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA12715 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:17:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxyw-00002p-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:17:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxy0-0007kz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:16:45 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvxxU-0007gV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:16:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvxxK-0002l1-FL; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:16:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avxx6-0002hg-Ci for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:15:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA12686 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:15:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avxx5-0007fh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:15:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvxwA-0007bD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:14:50 -0500 Received: from rodin.i2r.a-star.edu.sg ([192.122.139.27] helo=i2r.a-star.edu.sg) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvxvP-0007WE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:14:04 -0500 Received: from newmailhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by i2r.a-star.edu.sg (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1PCDA7o018581 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:13:10 +0800 (SGT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([192.168.152.135]) by mailhost.lit.org.sg (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 1 (built Aug 19 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HTN000KI3A1W4@mailhost.lit.org.sg> for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:13:19 +0800 (SGT) Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 48C9D352D6; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:13:50 +0800 (SGT) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:13:50 +0800 From: "Sukanta K. Hazra" Subject: Re: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) In-reply-to: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> To: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Cc: manet@ietf.org, Charles.Perkins@nokia.com, ebelding@cs.ucsb.edu, sdas@ececs.uc.edu Mail-followup-to: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com, manet@ietf.org, Charles.Perkins@nokia.com, ebelding@cs.ucsb.edu, sdas@ececs.uc.edu Message-id: <20040225121350.GA27622@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> Organization: Institute for Infocomm Research MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline PGP-ID: 0x8E084AD5 Key-Fingerprint: 9C0D B00C C62A 7059 5314 99FC CE90 478A 8E08 4AD5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i References: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hi! Unless its a static network with very stable conditions, route information changes even before ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT has a chance to come into play. - Sukanta ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com" Date: Wed, 25 Feb, 2004 18:50 SGT Subject: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) > Hi, > > I did some GloMoSim simulations with AODV and experimented with the setting of the ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value. For the scenarios that I tested, I was surprised to see how little the performance degraded when I chose very large timeout values. I have obviously done something wrong - either not selected the right simulation scenarios or not measured the right things. > > To help me on the way, could someone please tell me the most important networking aspects that prohibits the choice of a large ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT. What are the main trade-offs when setting this value? Or could someone give me a pointer to relevant publications. > > Thanks, > Paal > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet -- Sukanta K. Hazra (Mr.) Institute for Infocomm Research Tel: +65 6874-1953 Fax: +65 6776-8109 Homepage: http://www1.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/~sukanta/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 07:55:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14641 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:55:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvyYr-0005vz-Ry for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:54:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PCsnfa022805 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:54:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvyYr-0005vk-L2 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:54:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14612 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:54:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvyYq-0004E6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:54:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvyXq-00047v-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:53:47 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvyXG-00043N-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:53:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvyX8-0005cr-Bf; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:53:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AvyWr-0005c5-7N for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:52:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14545 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:52:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvyWq-00042U-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:52:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AvyVt-0003yA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:51:46 -0500 Received: from aun.it.uu.se ([130.238.12.36] ident=0) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AvyVJ-0003u2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 07:51:09 -0500 Received: from [130.238.8.241] (dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se [130.238.8.241]) by aun.it.uu.se (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1PCp8Ur003658; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:51:08 +0100 (MET) Subject: Re: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) From: Erik =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nordstr=F6m?= To: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <1077710169.6384.1.camel@dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se> References: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> <1077710169.6384.1.camel@dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Message-Id: <1077713463.6384.24.camel@dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:51:03 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by aun.it.uu.se id i1PCp8Ur003658 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just wanted to add that ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT probably just works as a garbage collection timer, making sure that there is no stale information in the network. /Erik On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 12:56, Erik Nordstr=C3=B6m wrote: > hi, >=20 > Isn't it the case that routes are often preempted by other events, such > as link break (link layer feedback or HELLO messages), with the result > that ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT doesn't really matter that much? >=20 > //Erik >=20 > On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 11:50, Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com wrote: > > Hi, > >=20 > > I did some GloMoSim simulations with AODV and experimented with the s= etting of the ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value. For the scenarios that I tested= , I was surprised to see how little the performance degraded when I chose= very large timeout values. I have obviously done something wrong - eithe= r not selected the right simulation scenarios or not measured the right t= hings. > >=20 > > To help me on the way, could someone please tell me the most importan= t networking aspects that prohibits the choice of a large ACTIVE_ROUTE_TI= MEOUT. What are the main trade-offs when setting this value? Or could som= eone give me a pointer to relevant publications. > >=20 > > Thanks, > > Paal > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 08:26:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA15691 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:26:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avz2r-00006v-O5 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:25:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PDPn2l000424 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:25:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avz2r-00006l-Id for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:25:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA15665 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:25:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avz2q-0006xg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:25:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avz1t-0006rV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:24:49 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avz1G-0006me-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:24:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avz17-0008FE-LW; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:24:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Avz0x-0008Eo-DX for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:23:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA15620 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:23:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avz0w-0006lj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:23:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Avz00-0006h9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:22:53 -0500 Received: from bay12-f5.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.5] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Avyzo-0006bo-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:22:40 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:17:36 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:17:36 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:47:36 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2004 13:17:36.0821 (UTC) FILETIME=[BC8D9E50:01C3FBA1] Subject: [manet] Tora Traces Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Dear all, I have done simulations on NS2 with TORA routing protocol. and got traces of it with simulation environment 1000x1000 m, mobility at 1 m/s, cbr traffic with 100 sources. the script which i used to find throughput for DSDV AODV and DSR protocol i applied it to the TORA tarces. the result i got is 0. is it possible. or my script is wrong? or May be there is another method to find throughput in TORA. Please help. I am in urgent need of the analysis of the Protocol. Thanx in Advance. ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Oscar fever is on! It's Hollywood's biggest party. http://server1.msn.co.in/sp04/oscars/index.asp Get all the dope here. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 10:04:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19388 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:04:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw0Zq-0002dm-4k for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:04:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PF3wxc010121 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:03:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw0Zp-0002ag-6U for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:03:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19320 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:03:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw0Zn-00014R-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:03:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw0Yo-0000yQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:02:55 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw0YB-0000tM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:02:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw0Xy-0000rq-Ax; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:02:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw0Xj-0000j2-R0 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:01:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19268 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:01:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw0Xh-0000rG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:01:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw0Wk-0000lh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:00:46 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw0Vq-0000bc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:59:50 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1PEx6s3015885; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:59:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004022509590522733 ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:59:05 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.2.20040225095210.02a52958@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:59:21 -0500 To: "Sukanta K. Hazra" , richard.r.herron@L-3com.com From: Joe Macker Subject: Re: [manet] Very basic questions Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040225062914.GA24088@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> References: <31892CFAF4097F488320D5FFDC60074001A1C697@slxcg01.csw.L-3com.com> <20040225062914.GA24088@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 At 01:29 AM 2/25/2004, Sukanta K. Hazra wrote: >Hi Richard, > >Most MANET routing protocols use host based routing, each node's routing >table keeps an entry to a host. On the other hand in traditional IP >routing, the nodes have routing table have entries to networks. That >is where the subnet concept comes into play, its a mean of aggregation. Most MANET Routing can support prefixes as well just like normal IP routing. there is often a misconception that MANETs do not allow for attached networks. So there's no problem here. What is different is that unlike "some" wired protocols.. MANET protocol neighbor interface associations do not require the interfaces to be from some preconfigured subnet space. More recent wired protocols (e.g., OSPFv3) also allow this too. >Regards, >Sukanta >----- Original Message ----- >From: "richard.r.herron@L-3com.com" >Date: Wed, 25 Feb, 2004 01:49 SGT >Subject: [manet] Very basic questions > >> Hello all, >> >> I have some very basic questions about routing in MANETs. >> I have some experience with IPv4 routing in fixed systems >> which may be causing me some confusion when it comes to MANETs. >> >> My stick figure below is intended to represent two systems, >> X and Y. Each system has an Ethernet LAN interface and >> a Wireless interface. >> >> The Ethernet LAN on system X is subnet A, the wireless >> interface has an address on subnet B. >> >> The Ethernet LAN on system Y is subnet D, the wireless >> interface has an address on subnet C. >> >> B C >> >> V V >> | | >> ------- | | ------- D >> A | |-- --| |__ _|_ _|_ _ >> _ _|_ _|_ __| X | | Y | | | | >> | | | | | | | >> ------- ------- >> >> I don't see how systems X and Y can communicate over the >> wireless interfaces unless these interfaces are on the same >> subnet. Furthermore, if a similar system, Z, moves into the >> area how can it communicate unless its wireless interface is >> also on the same subnet? >> >> I have read that in a MANET the address is tied to the device >> not a topological location and that subnets don't really have >> a meaning in a MANET. Does this mean that the wireless >> interfaces all have vastly different IP addresses and can be >> arbitrarily assigned? >> >> What would the route table entry on system X look like >> to route a packet to system Y? What would the route entry >> on system X look like in order to route packets to a >> system on Ethernet LAN D attached to system Y? >> >> Finally, do the answers depend on which MANET protocol is >> being used? >> >> I have read several papers about DSR, AODV and OLSR and I am >> still missing this concept. >> >> I would greatly appreciate any help this group can give. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Richard Herron >> L-3 Communications >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> manet mailing list >> manet@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > >-- >Sukanta K. Hazra (Mr.) >Institute for Infocomm Research >Tel: +65 6874-1953 Fax: +65 6776-8109 >Homepage: http://www1.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/~sukanta/ > > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 11:30:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26772 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:30:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw1vP-0007Bs-PT for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:30:21 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PGUJXM027639 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:30:19 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw1vP-0007Bi-L0 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:30:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26587 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:30:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw1vO-0004S3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:30:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw1rk-0003hR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:26:33 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw1qr-0003Xj-03 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:25:37 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Aw1lk-0001Wh-5t for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:20:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw1lX-00062w-Ha; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:20:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw1lN-00061J-D6 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:19:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26010 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:19:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw1lM-0002wj-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:19:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw1kV-0002s1-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:19:05 -0500 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.62]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw1k8-0002my-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:18:40 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-006castocp0266.dialsprint.net ([63.187.49.12] helo=Panoramic) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Aw1k2-0002Wy-00; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:18:35 -0800 Message-ID: <000901c3fbbb$1d46ef30$0c31bb3f@Panoramic> From: "Richard Ogier" To: "Spagnolo, Phillip A" , "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" References: <2AFCB5FA378DEE4CA704B9AD7764637901839BA6@xch-nw-26.nw.nos.boeing.com> Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:19:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To Phil and the authors of the MPRF draft: Although your suggested modification is simple, it is also *very* inefficient. For example, in a simulation I ran for a network with 500 nodes and a diameter of 4 hops, the modification you suggested results in 200 transmissions of a single flooded packet, whereas the original (incorrect) version results in only 21 transmissions. The reason for the inefficiency is easy to see. Since each node computes its MPRs independently, if each node computes an average of 6 MPRs, then to reach all nodes 4 hops away can require 6*6*6 = 216 transmissions. This is because each MPR of each MPR of each MPR of the originator must transmit the packet. To fix this, I suggest the following modification. The key is to choose a unique neighbor that transmitted a given flooded packet, one that different receivers will agree on. In the original version, each node selected the neighbor from which the flooded packet was *first* received, but as my example showed, different receivers may not agree on this choice. One solution is for each node to select the neighbor with the minimum address from which the flooded packet was received, and to relay the packet only if this neighbor is an MPR selector. However, this is still not efficient because a neighbor selected in this manner may actually be farther from the originator than the receiving node. Ideally, only neighbors that are closer to the originator should be considered. Therfore, it makes sense to consider the TTL of the received flooded packet when making the decision to forward. Therefore, in my suggested modification, each node selects the neighbor with lexicographic maximum value of (TTL, neighbor address) from which a given flooded packet (identified by the FPI) was received, and relays the packet if and only if this selected neighbor is an MPR selector. In the example I gave, only node 5 would relay the packet, since node 3 is its MPR selector, assuming that node 3 has a larger address than node 2. This requires that the Flooding History Table (for the MPRF draft) or the LSF Duplicate Table (for the WOSPF draft) include the following additional information for each flooded packet: the TTL and the address of the neighbor from which the packet was received. As with distance-vector routing, there is a timing issue here. If a node immediately forwards a flooded packet the first time it is received from an MPR selector, then it might later receive the same packet from a neighbor with larger value of (TTL, neighbor address) that is not an MPR selector, in which case it did not have to relay the packet. Therefore, if a node receives the same flooded packet from multiple neighbors before it relays the packet, it should select the neighbor as described above, and relay the packet if and only if the selected neighbor is an MPR selector. Therefore, it may be beneficial to wait a small amount of time before deciding whether to forward a received flooded packet. As stated in draft-ogier-manet-ospf-extension-00.txt, for link-state routing protocols that can compute the next hop p(u) to each destination u, where I assume that p(u) is selected consistently by all nodes, e.g., using router ID to break ties, then a better flooding rule is to relay a received (non-duplicate) flooded packet if and only if p(u) is an MPR selector, regardless of which neighbor the packet was received from. (So nodes do not have to know which neighbor the packet was received from.) Assuming that the MANET extension of OSPF uses MPRs for flooding LSAs, I think this is the flooding scheme that should be used. If I am correct, then this rule should be used in both Cisco's OSPF extension and in your WOSPF draft. (If you do this, then please give me credit as appropriate.) Regards, Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spagnolo, Phillip A" To: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 6:23 AM Subject: RE: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > Richard, > You are correct on the WOSPF draft. We suggest the following change to > the draft. This should be an easy change. Thanks for helping. > > Phil > > _______________________________________________________________________ > 5. Protocol Data Structures > > This section defines extensions to Section 5 of [OSPF]. > > > LSF duplicate table > > The Link State Flood duplicate table keeps track of which > LSFs have been seen. Each tuple in the table consists of > the originator's Router ID, the flooding sequence number, > the time at which the entry expires, and a flag that > indicates whether the LSF has been flooded. The table > should be empty upon initialization. > > 13.1. LSF message generation > > Each wireless interface originates an LSF every LSF_INTERVAL. Each > time a node generates an LSF it MUST increment the flooding sequence > number and add the LSF to the duplicate table. In this table, the > node records a duplicate tuple: (originator address, flooding > sequence number, expiration time, flooded flag). The flooded flag > denotes whether the LSF has been flooded by this node before. The > LSF MUST be removed from the duplicate table after it expires. > > > 13.2. LSF message processing > > Each incoming LSF is searched for in the duplicate table. > > 1 If the LSF is in the duplicate table, or if the LSF is older > than the LSF found in the table proceed with the bullets. > An LSF is know to be older if the sequence number of the LSF > in the table is greater than the received LSF's sequence > number. Standard modulo sequence number comparisons should > be applied. > a. If the sender is in the MPR selector table, but the > flooded flag is not TRUE in the duplicate table then > the LSF is flooded out all MANET interfaces, the > > flooded flag is set to TRUE in the duplicate table, > and the LSF packet is discarded > b. Else, The LSF packet is discarded. > > 2 Else, the LSF is added to the LSF duplicate table, and the > LSAs are processed according to section 13.3. > a. If the sender is in the MPR selector table, the LSF is > flooded out all MANET interfaces, and the flooded flag > is set to TRUE in the duplicate table. > b. Else, the flooded flag is set to FALSE in the > duplicate table. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Ogier [mailto:ogier@erg.sri.com] > > Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:47 AM > > To: Charles E. Perkins > > Cc: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document > > initial revision > > > > > > Here is an example where the MPRF protocol does not work. > > (Although it can be fixed as explained below.) > > > > > > 8 > > / \ > > 2-----5 > > / \ / \ > > / \ / \ > > 1 / 7 > > \ / \ / > > \ / \ / > > 3-----6 > > \ / > > 9 > > > > > > Node 1 is the source (originator of flooded packets), > > and its MPRs are nodes 2 and 3. > > Node 2 selects node 6 as MPR (to cover 3, 7, and 9) > > Node 3 selects node 5 as MPR (to cover 2, 7, and 8). > > > > Node 1 originates a packet, which is relayed by nodes 2 and 3. > > Suppose node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, then > > from node 3. > > Suppose node 6 receives the packet first from node 3, then > > from node 2. > > (I explain below how this is possible.) > > Since node 2 is not an MPR selector of node 5, node 5 does not relay > > the packet when it is received from node 2, but creates an entry > > in the Flooding History (step 5.1 in the draft). > > Then, when node 5 receives the packet from node 3 (its MPR selector), > > node 5 ignores the packet (step 2 in the draft). > > Therefore, node 5 does not relay the packet. > > Similarly, node 6 does not relay the packet. > > Therefore, node 7 never receives the packet. > > > > I think the solution is for each node to remember > > which flooded packets it has already transmitted. > > If a node receives a flooded packet from an MPR selector, > > and has not yet transmitted the same packet, then it > > should relay the packet. > > > > I think the same problem exists in > > draft-spagnolo-manet-ospf-wireless-interface-00 > > > > I can think of 3 situations that can result in the > > above example (in which node 5 receives the packet first from > > node 2, and node 6 receives the packet first from node 3): > > > > 1. Very long propagation delays. > > 2. As stated in the Introduction of the draft, link layer > > broadcast can be accomplished using iterated unicast. > > 3. If the flooded packet is sent reliably to all neighbors using > > ACKs with retransmissions, then the first transmission from > > node 2 (resp. 3) might be received only by node 5 (resp. 6). > > > > Regards, > > Richard > > > > P.S. Regarding the terms "reflood" and "retransmit". > > > > "Reflood" means to flood the packet again to all nodes. > > RFC 2328 for OSPF uses this term correctly, but some > > people have recently used it to mean "relay". > > > > "Retransmit" means for the same node to transmit the packet again, > > usually because an ACK was not received. > > It will be very confusing when we talk about reliable flooding > > with ACKs, if we use the word "retransmit" to mean both > > retransmission from the same node, and relaying a packet > > received from another node. > > > > When talking about a node relaying a packet, I suggest using > > either the term "relay" or "transmit". > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 11:41:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27919 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:41:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw25i-00006Z-MM for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:40:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PGewsl000395 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:40:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw25i-00006I-Gu for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:40:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27864 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:40:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw25h-0006AO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:40:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw24o-00063K-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:40:02 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw23v-0005xT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:39:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw23p-0008Aj-48; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:39:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw23e-0008AI-46 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:38:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27777 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:38:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw23d-0005vG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:38:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw22h-0005pl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:37:52 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw21l-0005fV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:36:53 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1PGa9T31939; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:36:09 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402251636> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdT76FpG; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:23:58 PST Message-ID: <403CCC14.61AB30F2@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:23:48 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ext Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?Nordstr=F6m?= CC: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com, manet@ietf.org, Ian Chakeres , "Samir R. Das" , "Elizabeth M.Belding-Royer" Subject: Re: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) References: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> <1077710169.6384.1.camel@dhcp-8-241.it.uu.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello folks, ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT was designed to reduce the effect of useless routes on the rest of the protocol. I expect that as nodes move faster, its value should decrease. Expiring old routes is valuable, for two reasons: - Reduce latency by avoiding the attempt to use broken routes, and - Reduce extraneous route repair operations I would like to see an in-depth study of the route timeout values versus performance versus relative node speeds. It would be especially nice if the value could be adaptive, so that the characteristics of the route would depend upon the movement characteristics of the nodes offering the route to the endpoints. Regards, Charlie P. ext Erik Nordstrvm wrote: > > hi, > > Isn't it the case that routes are often preempted by other events, such > as link break (link layer feedback or HELLO messages), with the result > that ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT doesn't really matter that much? > > //Erik > > On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 11:50, Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I did some GloMoSim simulations with AODV and experimented with the setting of the ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value. For the scenarios that I tested, I was surprised to see how little the performance degraded when I chose very large timeout values. I have obviously done something wrong - either not selected the right simulation scenarios or not measured the right things. > > > > To help me on the way, could someone please tell me the most important networking aspects that prohibits the choice of a large ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT. What are the main trade-offs when setting this value? Or could someone give me a pointer to relevant publications. > > > > Thanks, > > Paal > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 12:43:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02142 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:43:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw33i-0005kE-Co for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:42:58 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PHgw54022076 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:42:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw33h-0005jz-T5 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:42:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02114 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:42:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw33g-0005b6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:42:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw32l-0005UB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:42:00 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw31y-0005Ou-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:41:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw31q-0005DZ-FJ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:41:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw30v-0005Bw-ME for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:40:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02006 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:40:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw30u-0005Ig-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:40:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw30B-0005DF-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:39:20 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw2zZ-00052l-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:38:41 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1PHc9S22736; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:38:09 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402251738> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdxNDVnk; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:38:07 PST Message-ID: <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:37:57 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Ogier CC: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Richard, Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many times that the terminology surrounding the flooding discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions to our terminology. The example you give is, I think, applicable to other situations where an MPR node receives a flooded packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me that a very simple fix would work, though. If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the packet again to its neighbors, and mark the packet as already processed. This can be accomplished by modifying step 5.2 to read as follows: 5.2 If this node is MPR for any of its neighbors, and if the time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- sage reduced by one. I must admit that I have only been puzzling over your observation for a little while, so I might have missed something. But even without the problem you raised, this approach would be better for two reasons: - Reduced broadcast latency, and - Better robustness when the MPR selector's local (typically unreliable!) broadcast is lost for some reason. Lastly, I think I like this approach because I seem to remember wanting to put it in a long time ago and I just forgot to do so. Regards, Charlie P. Richard Ogier wrote: > > Here is an example where the MPRF protocol does not work. > (Although it can be fixed as explained below.) > > 8 > / \ > 2-----5 > / \ / \ > / \ / \ > 1 / 7 > \ / \ / > \ / \ / > 3-----6 > \ / > 9 > > Node 1 is the source (originator of flooded packets), > and its MPRs are nodes 2 and 3. > Node 2 selects node 6 as MPR (to cover 3, 7, and 9) > Node 3 selects node 5 as MPR (to cover 2, 7, and 8). > > Node 1 originates a packet, which is relayed by nodes 2 and 3. > Suppose node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, then from node 3. > Suppose node 6 receives the packet first from node 3, then from node 2. > (I explain below how this is possible.) > Since node 2 is not an MPR selector of node 5, node 5 does not relay > the packet when it is received from node 2, but creates an entry > in the Flooding History (step 5.1 in the draft). > Then, when node 5 receives the packet from node 3 (its MPR selector), > node 5 ignores the packet (step 2 in the draft). > Therefore, node 5 does not relay the packet. > Similarly, node 6 does not relay the packet. > Therefore, node 7 never receives the packet. > > I think the solution is for each node to remember > which flooded packets it has already transmitted. > If a node receives a flooded packet from an MPR selector, > and has not yet transmitted the same packet, then it > should relay the packet. > > I think the same problem exists in > draft-spagnolo-manet-ospf-wireless-interface-00 > > I can think of 3 situations that can result in the > above example (in which node 5 receives the packet first from > node 2, and node 6 receives the packet first from node 3): > > 1. Very long propagation delays. > 2. As stated in the Introduction of the draft, link layer > broadcast can be accomplished using iterated unicast. > 3. If the flooded packet is sent reliably to all neighbors using > ACKs with retransmissions, then the first transmission from > node 2 (resp. 3) might be received only by node 5 (resp. 6). > > Regards, > Richard > > P.S. Regarding the terms "reflood" and "retransmit". > > "Reflood" means to flood the packet again to all nodes. > RFC 2328 for OSPF uses this term correctly, but some > people have recently used it to mean "relay". > > "Retransmit" means for the same node to transmit the packet again, > usually because an ACK was not received. > It will be very confusing when we talk about reliable flooding > with ACKs, if we use the word "retransmit" to mean both > retransmission from the same node, and relaying a packet > received from another node. > > When talking about a node relaying a packet, I suggest using > either the term "relay" or "transmit". > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 12:58:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02847 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:58:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw3IS-0006my-PQ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:58:13 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PHwCf6026090 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:58:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw3IS-0006mj-Gl for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:58:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02795 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:58:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw3IQ-0007CK-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:58:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw3HP-00073K-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:57:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw3GZ-0006wX-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:56:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw3GN-0006TJ-Mp; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:56:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw3GI-0006SL-GN for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:55:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02737 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:55:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw3GG-0006ux-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:55:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw3FO-0006pi-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:55:03 -0500 Received: from web21106.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.227.108]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw3En-0006ks-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:54:25 -0500 Message-ID: <20040225175424.65730.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.119.86.30] by web21106.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:54:24 PST Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:54:24 -0800 (PST) From: Vin Subject: Re: [manet] ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT in AODV (RFC 3561) To: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Cc: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A7@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 I also think that your traffic model plays a part.If you send packets continously from a starting point in time, ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT never gets a chance to come into play.It should come into play only if that route has been unused for that period of time.many simulations done on ns-2 are based on cbr traffic starting at a certain time and going on till end of simulation which isnt a good way to study the effect of ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT. Regards, Vinod --- Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com wrote: > Hi, > > I did some GloMoSim simulations with AODV and > experimented with the setting of the > ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value. For the scenarios that I > tested, I was surprised to see how little the > performance degraded when I chose very large timeout > values. I have obviously done something wrong - > either not selected the right simulation scenarios > or not measured the right things. > > To help me on the way, could someone please tell me > the most important networking aspects that prohibits > the choice of a large ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT. What are > the main trade-offs when setting this value? Or > could someone give me a pointer to relevant > publications. > > Thanks, > Paal > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ===== Vinod Namboodiri Graduate Student Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Massachusetts, Amherst __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 13:49:34 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04799 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:49:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw45i-0001xo-Tb for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:49:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PIn6lL007542 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:49:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw45i-0001xZ-Oz for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:49:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04741 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:49:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw45g-0004Il-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:49:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw44p-0004BJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:48:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw43t-00044x-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:47:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw43i-0001RU-7J; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:47:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw42i-0001OE-Gn for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:46:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04524 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:45:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw42g-0003vN-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:45:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw41n-0003qU-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:45:04 -0500 Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.83.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw40w-0003fg-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:44:10 -0500 Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1PIhUs3029619; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:43:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from SEXTANT.itd.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.92.22]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SAVSMTP 3.1.3.37) with SMTP id M2004022513433024740 ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:43:30 -0500 Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> X-Sender: macker@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:43:46 -0500 To: "Charles E. Perkins" , Richard Ogier From: Joe Macker Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Cc: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group In-Reply-To: <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: >Hello Richard, > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions >to our terminology. > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me >that a very simple fix would work, though. > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the >packet as already processed. Charlie: Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways to have more common or less common MPR sets. We have this MPR-F option functional in a working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy implementing things. -Joe _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 14:04:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05554 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4K9-00042s-N9 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:04:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PJ41Sr015541 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:04:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4K9-00042X-9W for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:04:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05506 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:03:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4K6-0005nU-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:03:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4JA-0005hF-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:03:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4IJ-0005c5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:02:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4IF-0003Jr-Pv; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:02:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4IB-0003IE-MX for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:01:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05388 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:01:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4I9-0005af-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:01:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4HI-0005Vh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:01:05 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4GO-0005L8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:00:08 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1PIxUc14851; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:59:30 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402251859> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from mvdhcp141214.americas.nokia.com (172.18.141.214, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdogHEyT; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:59:29 PST Message-ID: <403CEFF4.1010600@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:56:52 -0800 From: Charlie P Organization: NOKIA User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joe Macker CC: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Joe, I'm delighted to hear that you are creating the implementations. I'd like to find out whether you think we could use your experiences to improve the existing draft, and your suggestion about how to eliminate the need for knowing the previous hop. That would be a great simplification. I remember a probabilistic MPR selection algorithm that I wasn't too fond of. It seems to me that, if a broadcast failure occurs, it should be allowable only because of problems with the medium (or level of congestion), not probabilistically disfavored layouts. Do you have an opinion about this? Regards, Charlie P. Joe Macker wrote: >At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > >>Hello Richard, >> >>Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree >>with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many >>times that the terminology surrounding the flooding >>discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go >>through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions >>to our terminology. >> >>The example you give is, I think, applicable to other >>situations where an MPR node receives a flooded >>packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me >>that a very simple fix would work, though. >> >>If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY >>neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the >>packet again to its neighbors, and mark the >>packet as already processed. >> >> >Charlie: > >Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing >that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. >The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways >to have more common or less common MPR sets. > >We have this MPR-F option functional in a >working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). >We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a >few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. > >I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy >implementing things. > >-Joe > > > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 14:20:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06365 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:20:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4Zy-0005el-AH for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:20:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PJKMtW021737 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:20:22 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4Zx-0005eW-P3 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:20:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06314 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:20:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4Zv-0007Tm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:20:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4Yr-0007J7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:19:13 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4Xs-0007Bs-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:18:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4Xh-0005Fy-K9; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:18:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw4Ws-0005D8-T0 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:17:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06160 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:17:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4Wq-00075B-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:17:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4Vz-0006zM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:16:15 -0500 Received: from albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.120]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw4VP-0006sv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:15:39 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-013castocp0267.dialsprint.net ([63.187.129.13] helo=Panoramic) by albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Aw4Uh-00074n-00; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:14:55 -0800 Message-ID: <000b01c3fbd3$bfd4a040$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> From: "Richard Ogier" To: "Charles E. Perkins" , "Joe Macker" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 11:15:35 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). So let's not forget about efficiency. There are several other methods that avoid having to know the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a flooded packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing several of these via simulations and will announce the results in a few weeks. Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Macker" To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > >Hello Richard, > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > >to our terminology. > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > >packet as already processed. > Charlie: > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). > We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a > few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy > implementing things. > > -Joe > > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 15:13:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA10180 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:13:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5Oy-0002XU-Nx for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:13:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PKD4gJ009753 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:13:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5Oy-0002XA-IL for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:13:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA10094 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:13:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5Ox-0005Ti-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:13:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5Nw-0005Lh-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:12:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5N1-0005EM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:11:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5N0-0001O8-Ez; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:11:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5MS-00012e-Em for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:10:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09751 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:10:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5MD-000577-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:10:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5LD-00050i-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:09:12 -0500 Received: from mail.ece.gatech.edu ([199.77.227.200]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5Kb-0004uo-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:08:33 -0500 Received: from yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu (yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu [130.207.232.10]) by mail.ece.gatech.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1PK8WRq022127 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:08:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (jau@localhost) by yamsrv2.ece.gatech.edu (8.12.0.Beta19/8.12.0.Beta19/Submit) with ESMTP id i1PK8WSY000968 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:08:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:08:32 -0500 (EST) From: Jaudelice Cavalcante de Oliveira To: manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-SPAM: NO Subject: [manet] Med-Hoc-Net 2004 Extended deadline (March 12) and EDAS submission Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,LINES_OF_YELLING autolearn=no version=2.60 We apologize if you receive multiple copies of this message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ANNOUNCEMENTS: - PAPER SUBMISSION DEADLINE IS EXTENDED TO MARCH 12, 2004. - PAPERS WILL BE SUBMITTED THROUGH EDAS SYSTEM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Med-Hoc-Net 2004 The Third Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop June 27-30, 2004, Bodrum, Turkey http://www.medhoc04/diit/unict.it Call for Papers ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scope: Ad hoc network applications are emerging continuously imposing their own stringent constraints which cannot be fulfilled by generic approaches and thus spur new research efforts. Therefore, ad hoc networks attract growing attention from the research community. The aim of Med-Hoc-Net 2004 is to serve as a platform for researchers and visionaries from academia, research labs, and industry from all over the globe to share their ideas, views, results, and experiences in the field of ad-hoc networking and communications. Med-Hoc-Net 2004 will include presentations of theoretical and experimental achievements, innovative ad-hoc systems, prototyping efforts, case studies, and advancements in technology directly affecting ad-hoc networking and communications infrastructures. The papers solicited in Med-Hoc-Net 2004 cover a variety of topics including but not limited to: - Novel ad-hoc network architectures and applications, - Sensor network applications and protocols, - Implementations, testbeds, and prototypes, - Interfacing ad-hoc systems with different networks, - Resource discovery and management, - Power management and control, - Call admission and traffic shaping policies for ad-hoc networks, - Multimedia location services, - Self organization and network reconfiguration, - Protocols for QoS support in ad-hoc networks, - QoS support in Bluetooth, HIPERLAN, IEEE 802.11 etc., - MAC protocols, scheduling, and radio resource sharing in ad hoc networks, - Unicast and multicast routing algorithms and protocols, - Transport layer protocols for multi-hop networks, - Congestion control, - Performance evaluation of ad-hoc network protocols through simulations, analysis, and measurements, - Security in ad-hoc networks, - Fault tolerance and error recovery - Signal processing algorithms (coding, compression) for ad-hoc networks The program committee will referee all papers, and accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings. Papers of particular merit will be published in the Elsevier Ad Hoc Networks Journal. Manuscripts must be formatted according to the IEEE double-column standard format, except the font size, which must be 11pt. Authors should use only standard fonts, i.e., Times Roman, Courier, Symbol, and Helvetica, or their equivalent. The maximum length of the manuscript is 12 pages. NEW: THE PAPER SUBMISSION DEADLINE IS EXTENDED TO MARCH 12, 2004 PAPERS WILL BE SUBMITTED THROUGH EDAS SYSTEM Papers should be submitted in pdf or ps format through EDAS system (http://edas.info) according to the following timetable: Important Dates: Full Paper Electronic Submission: March 12, 2004 Tutorial proposal submission: April 15, 2004 Notification of Acceptance/Rejection: May 3, 2004 Camera ready submission of full papers: May 17, 2004 Tutorial date: June 27, 2004 Conference dates: June 28-30, 2004 Organization Committee: General Chair: Ian F. Akyildiz, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA General Vice Chair: Erdal Cayirci, Istanbul Technical University, TURKEY Technical Program Chairs: Giacomo Morabito, University of Catania, ITALY Eylem Ekici, Ohio State University, USA Tutorial Chairs: Francesca Cuomo, University of Rome - La Sapienza, ITALY Christos Douligeris, University of Piraeus, GREECE Publicity Chairs: Buyurman Baykal, Middle East Technical University, TURKEY Jaudelice Cavalcante de Oliveira, Drexel University, USA Registration Chair: Sebnem Baydere, Yeditepe University, TURKEY Technical Program Committee: Khaldoun Al Agha, Laboratoire de Recherche en Informatique, FRANCE Hamid Aghvami, King's College London, UK Eitan Altman, INRIA, FRANCE Roberto Battiti, University of Trento, ITALY Raouf Boutaba, University of Waterloo, CANADA Walid Dabbous, INRIA, FRANCE Magda El Zarki, University of California at Irvine, USA Luigi Fratta, Politecnico di Milano, ITALY Mario Gerla, UCLA, USA Paul J. M. Havinga, University of Twente, NETHERLANDS Ahmed Helmy, University of Southern California, USA Farouk Kamoun, ENSI, TUNISIA Holger Karl, Technical University of Berlin, GERMANY Ulf Korner, Lund Institute of Technology, SWEDEN Bhaskar Krishnamachari, University of Southern California, USA Marwan Krunz, University of Arizona, USA Albert Levi, Sabanci University, TURKEY Janise McNair, University of Florida, USA Lazaros Merakos, University of Athens, GREECE Ioanis Nikolaidis, University of Alberta, CANADA Ariel Orda, Technion, ISRAEL Sergio Palazzo, University of Catania, ITALY Giovanni Pau, UCLA, USA Chiara Petrioli, University of Rome "La Sapienza", ITALY Andreas Pitsillides, University of Cyprus, CYPRUS Guy Pujolle, LIP6, FRANCE Paolo Santi, CNR, ITALY Adrian Segall, Technion, ISRAEL Ness Shroff, Purdue University, USA Moshe Sidi, Technion, ISRAEL Raghupathy Sivakumar, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA Ioannis Stavrakakis, University of Athens, GREECE Ivan Stojmenovic, University of Ottawa, CANADA Violet R. Syrotiuk, Arizona State University, USA Leandros Tassiulas, University of Thessaly, GREECE Damla Turgut, University of Central Florida, USA Bernhard H. Walke, Aachen University of Technology, GERMANY Wenye Wang, North Carolina State University, USA Michele Zorzi, University of Ferrara, ITALY _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 15:37:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA12444 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:37:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5lj-0008On-RE for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:36:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PKaZtV032284 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:36:35 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5lj-0008Od-K2 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:36:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA12387 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:36:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5li-0000mj-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:36:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5kP-0000XO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:35:14 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5jK-0000Mu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:34:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5jG-00082a-MM; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:34:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw5ic-000811-Tx for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:33:23 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA12109 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:33:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5ib-0000Fk-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:33:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5hZ-00008a-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:32:18 -0500 Received: from cheviot3.ncl.ac.uk ([128.240.233.117] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw5gi-0007me-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:31:25 -0500 Received: from [128.240.230.4] (msvpn2-4.ncl.ac.uk [128.240.230.4]) by cheviot3.ncl.ac.uk (8.10.1-20030918-patch/8.10.1) with ESMTP id i1PKVDa10755; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:31:13 GMT In-Reply-To: <403CEFF4.1010600@iprg.nokia.com> References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <403CEFF4.1010600@iprg.nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <8D8FFBB2-67D1-11D8-A327-000A9575BD30@ncl.ac.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group , Joe Macker From: Einar Vollset Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:31:12 +0000 To: Charlie P X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) X-Newcastle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact Postmaster@newcastle.ac.uk for more information X-Newcastle-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As this vaguely within my field I thought I'd pipe up. > I remember a probabilistic MPR selection > algorithm that I wasn't too fond of. It seems > to me that, if a broadcast failure occurs, it > should be allowable only because of problems > with the medium (or level of congestion), not > probabilistically disfavored layouts. Do you > have an opinion about this? > In general, I think it might not be as straight forward as that. The choice might be as follows: 1) a deterministic broadcast algorithm which leads to failures as the overhead of constructing the MPR means that the medium is congested. or 2) a probabilistic protocol which has a high (possibly _very_ high) likely hood of not failing, partly because there is less overhead due to constructing the MPR. I don't think discarding probabilistic approaches is necessarily the best approach. For example, alot of good work has been done by Luo, Eugster and Hubaux at EPFL as well as Ken Birman's group at Cornell in arguing the merits of probabilistic approaches. One of their main arguments is scalability, which is particularly timely with the formation of the ANS IRTF group (though perhaps less so now with the renaming ;-) p.s. Out of interest, what are the parameters used for the simulations which the decisions are being made on? Cheers, Einar ---------------------------------------- Einar Vollset PhD Student School of Computing Science University of Newcastle, UK http://vollset.org ----------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 16:42:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16610 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:42:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw6n4-0005tN-E4 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:42:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PLg27b022643 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:42:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw6n3-0005t8-Qt for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:42:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16559 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:41:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw6n1-0000Ic-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:41:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw6m9-0000BG-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:41:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw6lH-00005Q-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:40:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw6lB-0005Z3-ES; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:40:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw6kG-0005Xw-WA for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:39:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16460 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:39:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw6kF-0007m5-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:39:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw6jH-0007gq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:38:08 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw6iq-0007bp-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:37:40 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1PLb8230912; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:37:08 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402252137> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpd7Z7l8W; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:37:04 PST Message-ID: <403D1576.97F72C27@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:36:54 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Ogier CC: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <000b01c3fbd3$bfd4a040$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Richard, I did go back and look over the discussion that you cited. It was very interesting work. I have some further comments. I suppose I have been assuming that the MPRs themselves form a connected dominating set. This provides assurance that a message transmitted by all MPRs goes everywhere. I believe this assumption is justified by the selection algorithm. Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. My suggested change amounts to a "premature" scheduling of this guaranteed relay operation. In other words, I _claim_ that it "cannot" produce _more_ transmissions, if the MPR selector itself is an MPR. If my _claim_ is correct, then I can't see how Cedric's simulations would show that more packets were sent. Perhaps the aforementioned step 5.2 needs one further refinement: 5.2 If this node is MPR for any neighboring MPR, and if the time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- sage reduced by one. If my claim is incorrect, it would be very helpful for me if you might explain why. Regards, Charlie P. Richard Ogier wrote: > > Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about > a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that > it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case > about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). > So let's not forget about efficiency. > > There are several other methods that avoid having to know > the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen > or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a flooded > packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, > or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing > several of these via simulations and will announce the results > in a few weeks. > > Richard > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Joe Macker" > To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > > >Hello Richard, > > > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > >to our terminology. > > > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > >packet as already processed. > > Charlie: > > > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. > > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). > > We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a > > few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. > > > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy > > implementing things. > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 17:24:34 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19338 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:24:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw7Rn-0001dp-EQ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:24:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PMO7O9006303 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:24:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw7Rn-0001da-AA for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:24:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19292 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:24:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw7Rl-0005TQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:24:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw7Qp-0005Mg-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:23:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw7Pv-0005HM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:22:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw7Pl-00014U-DO; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:22:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw7Or-0000zE-A3 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:21:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19125 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:21:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw7Op-00057w-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:21:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw7Np-0004xp-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:20:02 -0500 Received: from web41311.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.60]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw7Mj-0004eK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:18:53 -0500 Message-ID: <20040225221823.59273.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.205.153.167] by web41311.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:18:23 PST Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:18:23 -0800 (PST) From: Sochi K To: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040225201101.5240.57771.Mailman@www1.ietf.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-445744921-1077747503=:59196" Subject: [manet] Re: glomosim stdout Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_A autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-445744921-1077747503=:59196 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, I have recently installed glomosim. The original config file produced the correct results upon the test run. Then I ran the config.in under java gui in which I made the simulation parameter as real time. Now, if I run "./glomosim config.in" from bin, i get constant std out as follows: 0 30 0 281 213 250 1 1 0 30 1 640 180 250 1 1 ... 0 30 28 1544 1350 250 1 1 0 30 29 1856 1627 250 1 1 Node 0 (280.47, 212.84, 0.00). Node 1 (639.89, 179.14, 0.00). Node 2 (720.11, 198.10, 0.00). Node 3 (1211.61, 216.94, 0.00). ... Node 27 (1123.50, 1626.44, 0.00). Node 28 (1543.63, 1349.53, 0.00). Node 29 (1855.03, 1626.33, 0.00). Partition 1 (0 2) has range (0, 0) to (0, 0): 30 nodes Current Sim Time[s] = 0.000000000 Real Time[s] = 0 Completed 0% 5 1750078 24 25 12 5 1750811 24 19 12 ... 3 706554313 18 5 10 Current Sim Time[s] = 9.073651536 Real Time[s] = 76 Completed 1% 5 10013135049 3 4 12 5 10013135200 3 9 12 ... And so on. How to stop this member information from printing to screen... Thanks. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. --0-445744921-1077747503=:59196 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Hi, I have recently installed glomosim. The original config file produced the correct results upon the test run.  Then I ran the config.in under java gui in which I made the simulation parameter as real time. Now, if I run "./glomosim config.in" from bin, i get constant std out as follows:
 
0 30 0 281 213 250 1 1
0 30 1 640 180 250 1 1
...
0 30 28 1544 1350 250 1 1
0 30 29 1856 1627 250 1 1
Node 0 (280.47, 212.84, 0.00).
Node 1 (639.89, 179.14, 0.00).
Node 2 (720.11, 198.10, 0.00).
Node 3 (1211.61, 216.94, 0.00).
...
Node 27 (1123.50, 1626.44, 0.00).
Node 28 (1543.63, 1349.53, 0.00).
Node 29 (1855.03, 1626.33, 0.00).
Partition 1 (0 2) has range (0, 0) to (0, 0): 30 nodes
Current Sim Time[s] =    0.000000000  Real Time[s] =    0  Completed  0%
5 1750078 24 25 12
5 1750811 24 19 12
...
3 706554313 18 5 10
Current Sim Time[s] =    9.073651536  Real Time[s] =   76  Completed  1%
5 10013135049 3 4 12
5 10013135200 3 9 12
...
 
And so on. How to stop this member information from printing to screen...
 
Thanks.

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. --0-445744921-1077747503=:59196-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 18:07:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA21458 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:07:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw87Q-000085-3l for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:07:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PN77T8000475 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:07:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw87P-00007a-GG for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:07:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA21404 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:07:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw87M-00020n-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:07:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw86M-0001tE-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:06:03 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw85O-0001nv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:05:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw85P-0007ef-8k; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:05:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw84R-0007I1-Nl for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:04:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA21082 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:03:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw84O-0001jF-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:04:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw83U-0001eq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:03:04 -0500 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca ([142.103.6.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw82Z-0001aJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:02:07 -0500 Received: from granville.cs.ubc.ca (granville.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.7.20]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.12.10/8.11.4) with ESMTP id i1PN260L012182; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:02:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:02:06 -0800 (PST) From: Kan Cai To: Sochi K cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Re: glomosim stdout In-Reply-To: <20040225221823.59273.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <20040225221823.59273.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi: Set the following three options to NO in your config.in file GUI-OPTION NO GUI-RADIO NO GUI-ROUTING NO Hope it helps, ken On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Sochi K wrote: > > Hi, I have recently installed glomosim. The original config file produced the correct results upon the test run. Then I ran the config.in under java gui in which I made the simulation parameter as real time. Now, if I run "./glomosim config.in" from bin, i get constant std out as follows: > > 0 30 0 281 213 250 1 1 > 0 30 1 640 180 250 1 1 > ... > 0 30 28 1544 1350 250 1 1 > 0 30 29 1856 1627 250 1 1 > Node 0 (280.47, 212.84, 0.00). > Node 1 (639.89, 179.14, 0.00). > Node 2 (720.11, 198.10, 0.00). > Node 3 (1211.61, 216.94, 0.00). > ... > Node 27 (1123.50, 1626.44, 0.00). > Node 28 (1543.63, 1349.53, 0.00). > Node 29 (1855.03, 1626.33, 0.00). > Partition 1 (0 2) has range (0, 0) to (0, 0): 30 nodes > Current Sim Time[s] = 0.000000000 Real Time[s] = 0 Completed 0% > 5 1750078 24 25 12 > 5 1750811 24 19 12 > ... > 3 706554313 18 5 10 > Current Sim Time[s] = 9.073651536 Real Time[s] = 76 Completed 1% > 5 10013135049 3 4 12 > 5 10013135200 3 9 12 > ... > > And so on. How to stop this member information from printing to screen... > > Thanks. > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 18:24:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA22942 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:24:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8Nu-0004fu-Bk for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:24:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PNOAl8017969 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:24:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8Nt-0004fk-VV for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:24:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA22914 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:24:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8Nr-0003rz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:24:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8Mv-0003mB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:23:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8M1-0003gz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:22:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8Lq-0004OH-RM; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:22:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8Ky-0004Fz-QR for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:21:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA22805 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:21:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8Kv-0003aX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:21:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8K4-0003W7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:20:13 -0500 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8JZ-0003R8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:19:41 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-023castocp0383.dialsprint.net ([65.178.105.129] helo=Panoramic) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Aw8Ik-0003Kl-00; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:18:50 -0800 Message-ID: <013501c3fbf5$d2f13bd0$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> From: "Richard Ogier" To: "Charles E. Perkins" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <000b01c3fbd3$bfd4a040$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> <403D1576.97F72C27@iprg.nokia.com> Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:03:10 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Charlie, Suppose that each MPR is a guaranteed relay as you say: > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. Then the nodes that relay the packet are the MPRs of the originator, the MPRs of the MPRs of the originator, etc. However, I don't think this set of nodes includes every node that is an MPR of some neighboring MPR (as in your modified step 5.2). The difference is that there has to be a sequence of nodes u_1,..., u_n where u_n is the originator and each node is an MPR of the next node in the sequence. The difference is that the sequence must lead to the originator, and it might not. I will have additional suggestions soon. Regards, Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles E. Perkins" To: "Richard Ogier" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > Hello Richard, > > I did go back and look over the discussion that > you cited. It was very interesting work. I have > some further comments. > > I suppose I have been assuming that the MPRs > themselves form a connected dominating set. > This provides assurance that a message > transmitted by all MPRs goes everywhere. > I believe this assumption is justified by > the selection algorithm. > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > My suggested change amounts to a "premature" > scheduling of this guaranteed relay operation. > In other words, I _claim_ that it "cannot" produce > _more_ transmissions, if the MPR selector itself > is an MPR. > > If my _claim_ is correct, then I can't see how > Cedric's simulations would show that more packets > were sent. Perhaps the aforementioned step 5.2 > needs one further refinement: > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any neighboring MPR, and if the > time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- > sage reduced by one. > > If my claim is incorrect, it would be very > helpful for me if you might explain why. > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > > Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about > > a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that > > it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case > > about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). > > So let's not forget about efficiency. > > > > There are several other methods that avoid having to know > > the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen > > or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a flooded > > packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, > > or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing > > several of these via simulations and will announce the results > > in a few weeks. > > > > Richard > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joe Macker" > > To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" > > > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > > > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > > > > >Hello Richard, > > > > > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > > >to our terminology. > > > > > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > > >packet as already processed. > > > Charlie: > > > > > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > > > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. > > > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > > > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > > > > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > > > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). > > > We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a > > > few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. > > > > > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy > > > implementing things. > > > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > manet mailing list > > > manet@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 18:53:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24346 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8pv-00086p-AL for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PNr7Qu031165 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8pv-00086Z-1M for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24312 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8pr-0006vM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8ow-0006oV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:52:07 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8o4-0006iN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:51:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8nu-0007Ta-9D; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:51:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8n1-0007Qe-UN for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:50:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24194 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:50:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8my-0006bf-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:50:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8m2-0006WI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:49:06 -0500 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8lC-0006S7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:48:14 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-010castocp0211.dialsprint.net ([63.187.96.211] helo=Panoramic) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Aw8kj-0003Uq-00; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:47:45 -0800 Message-ID: <026d01c3fbf9$dcffb580$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> From: "Richard Ogier" To: "Charles E. Perkins" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <000b01c3fbd3$bfd4a040$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> <403D1576.97F72C27@iprg.nokia.com> Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:06:56 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Charlie, Suppose that each MPR is a guaranteed relay as you say: > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. Then the nodes that relay the packet are the MPRs of the originator, the MPRs of the MPRs of the originator, etc. However, I don't think this set of nodes includes every node that is an MPR of some neighboring MPR (as in your modified step 5.2). The difference is that there has to be a sequence of nodes u_1,..., u_n where u_n is the originator and each node is an MPR of the next node in the sequence. The difference is that the sequence must lead to the originator, and it might not. I will have additional suggestions soon. Regards, Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles E. Perkins" To: "Richard Ogier" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > Hello Richard, > > I did go back and look over the discussion that > you cited. It was very interesting work. I have > some further comments. > > I suppose I have been assuming that the MPRs > themselves form a connected dominating set. > This provides assurance that a message > transmitted by all MPRs goes everywhere. > I believe this assumption is justified by > the selection algorithm. > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > My suggested change amounts to a "premature" > scheduling of this guaranteed relay operation. > In other words, I _claim_ that it "cannot" produce > _more_ transmissions, if the MPR selector itself > is an MPR. > > If my _claim_ is correct, then I can't see how > Cedric's simulations would show that more packets > were sent. Perhaps the aforementioned step 5.2 > needs one further refinement: > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any neighboring MPR, and if the > time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- > sage reduced by one. > > If my claim is incorrect, it would be very > helpful for me if you might explain why. > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > > Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about > > a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that > > it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case > > about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). > > So let's not forget about efficiency. > > > > There are several other methods that avoid having to know > > the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen > > or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a flooded > > packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, > > or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing > > several of these via simulations and will announce the results > > in a few weeks. > > > > Richard > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joe Macker" > > To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" > > > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > > > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > > > > >Hello Richard, > > > > > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > > >to our terminology. > > > > > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > > >packet as already processed. > > > Charlie: > > > > > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > > > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. > > > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > > > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > > > > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > > > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). > > > We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a > > > few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. > > > > > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy > > > implementing things. > > > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > manet mailing list > > > manet@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 18:54:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24433 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:54:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8qs-0008Dz-JS for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:54:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1PNs6TX031609 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:54:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8qs-0008Dk-Fl for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:54:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24364 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:54:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8qp-000733-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:54:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8pp-0006v8-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:53:02 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8oq-0006l7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:52:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8or-0007i2-Rh; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:52:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aw8oD-0007Yt-4W for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:51:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24221 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:51:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8o9-0006jD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:51:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8nG-0006db-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:50:23 -0500 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aw8mk-0006Xy-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:49:50 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-010castocp0211.dialsprint.net ([63.187.96.211] helo=Panoramic) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Aw8mJ-0003xr-00; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:49:23 -0800 Message-ID: <028c01c3fbfa$17649790$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> From: "Richard Ogier" To: "Charles E. Perkins" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <000b01c3fbd3$bfd4a040$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> <403D1576.97F72C27@iprg.nokia.com> Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:09:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Charlie, Suppose that each MPR is a guaranteed relay as you say: > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. Then the nodes that relay the packet are the MPRs of the originator, the MPRs of the MPRs of the originator, etc. However, I don't think this set of nodes includes every node that is an MPR of some neighboring MPR (as in your modified step 5.2). The difference is that there has to be a sequence of nodes u_1,..., u_n where u_n is the originator and each node is an MPR of the next node in the sequence. The difference is that the sequence must lead to the originator, and it might not. I will have additional suggestions soon. Regards, Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles E. Perkins" To: "Richard Ogier" Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > Hello Richard, > > I did go back and look over the discussion that > you cited. It was very interesting work. I have > some further comments. > > I suppose I have been assuming that the MPRs > themselves form a connected dominating set. > This provides assurance that a message > transmitted by all MPRs goes everywhere. > I believe this assumption is justified by > the selection algorithm. > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > My suggested change amounts to a "premature" > scheduling of this guaranteed relay operation. > In other words, I _claim_ that it "cannot" produce > _more_ transmissions, if the MPR selector itself > is an MPR. > > If my _claim_ is correct, then I can't see how > Cedric's simulations would show that more packets > were sent. Perhaps the aforementioned step 5.2 > needs one further refinement: > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any neighboring MPR, and if the > time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- > sage reduced by one. > > If my claim is incorrect, it would be very > helpful for me if you might explain why. > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > > Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about > > a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that > > it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case > > about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). > > So let's not forget about efficiency. > > > > There are several other methods that avoid having to know > > the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen > > or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a flooded > > packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, > > or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing > > several of these via simulations and will announce the results > > in a few weeks. > > > > Richard > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joe Macker" > > To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" > > > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > > > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > > > > >Hello Richard, > > > > > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > > >to our terminology. > > > > > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > > >packet as already processed. > > > Charlie: > > > > > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > > > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. > > > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > > > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > > > > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > > > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET forwarding). > > > We are presently examining its robustness and performance in a > > > few scenarios against other more stateful approaches. > > > > > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy > > > implementing things. > > > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > manet mailing list > > > manet@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 20:50:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29464 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:50:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwAfG-00013V-53 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:50:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1Q1oD7b004021 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:50:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwAfC-00012k-Ei for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:50:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29429 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:50:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwAf9-0002xB-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:50:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwAeC-0002rW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:49:09 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwAdI-0002lN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:48:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwAd9-0000gV-6c; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:48:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwAcN-0000fZ-0b for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:47:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29323 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:47:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwAcK-0002eA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:47:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwAbQ-0002Z7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:46:17 -0500 Received: from [192.228.147.13] (helo=gate2a.sunway.edu.my) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwAan-0002Nw-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:45:37 -0500 Received: from nav.sunway.edu.my (nav.sunway.edu.my [172.16.0.8]) by gate2a.sunway.edu.my (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id i1Q1MBbU021087 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:22:11 +0800 Message-Id: <200402260122.i1Q1MBbU021087@gate2a.sunway.edu.my> Received: (from limvivi [172.16.5.21]) by nav.sunway.edu.my (SAVSMTP 3.1.2.35) with SMTP id M2004022609455007388 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:45:50 +0800 From: "vivi" To: "'Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group'" Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:45:50 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Thread-Index: AcP8ChcmJzfKCQshTj68RiU7S68B1A== Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] Link Survivability prediction in Glomosim Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am struggling to simulate mobility/link survivability prediction using Glomosim using ODMRP. All I have are the library codes provided in glomosim. Any guide or help at all will be appreciate. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 21:34:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA00731 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:34:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwBLn-0004im-V1 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:34:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1Q2YBct018148 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:34:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwBLn-0004id-GM for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:34:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA00692 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:34:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBLk-0006Zp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:34:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBKo-0006UV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:33:12 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBJt-0006Pi-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:32:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwBJh-0004Lj-NZ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:32:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwBIv-0004JL-3s for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:31:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA00638 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:31:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBIs-0006KI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:31:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBHv-0006Fr-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:30:12 -0500 Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBHa-0006Bf-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:29:50 -0500 Received: from canth.inria.fr (canth.inria.fr [128.93.17.102]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1Q2TIae019619; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 03:29:18 +0100 Received: from adjih by canth.inria.fr with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1AwBH4-0000qT-00; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 03:29:18 +0100 From: Cedric Adjih Reply-To: Cedric.Adjih@inria.fr To: "Richard Ogier" , "Charles E. Perkins" Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 03:29:17 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <005e01c3fbda$c2bd8b30$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> In-Reply-To: <005e01c3fbda$c2bd8b30$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402260329.18039.Cedric.Adjih@inria.fr> X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone, Sorry to jump in this discussion which I didn't follow, but my filter detected a reference to my name :-) Regarding the MPR flooding, the MPR retransmission problem was known: the MPR flooding proof, found, for instance in INRIA RR 4260, pages 8-9. (http://www.inria.fr/rrrt/rr-4260.html) implicitly relies on a total order of transmissions (by considering the "first" transmission). This assumption is reasonnable on a single channel interface. When you have multiple interfaces each respecting this assumption, a proven MPR flooding algorithm is the one found in the OLSR RFC. Then, long ago, we thought of the same idea independantly found by Richard, of using a "global order" on packets to retransmit, that is: - retransmit a packet iff . it has not been retransmitted . and it has been just received from an MPR selector . and it had been received only from nodes with greater ID than the MPR selector (or never been received). I note that Richard added the very interesting novelty of using TTL in the ordering which would improve results. [Note also, that if the only reason messages cannot be ordered, is because they are repeated on a link, then you can use the "retransmission count", to order them, if this information is available.] Now for some results: Some simulations results for the Dominating Set based on MPR are available in INRIA Research Report 4597 (http://www.inria.fr/rrrt/rr-4597.html). The important result is that the performance of dominating set based on MPRs, is very close to the performance of MPR flooding (see figure 6). This is expected. Some simulations results (some unpublished) we had are the following: |NeiCe| AvgNei | AllMPR | DomSet |MPRFlood|LO flood|LO+flood|Avg#MPR| | 7 | 7.6 | 67.30% | 54.24% | 48.48% | 56.05% | 53.59% | 3.1 | | 8 | 8.4 | 72.70% | 54.52% | 50.90% | 60.98% | 57.31% | 3.5 | | 10 | 10.3 | 75.10% | 50.43% | 47.55% | 59.99% | 54.80% | 4.1 | | 12 | 12.2 | 79.30% | 46.74% | 44.84% | 61.35% | 54.33% | 4.6 | | 15 | 15.0 | 80.20% | 40.05% | 38.35% | 57.31% | 48.41% | 4.9 | | 20 | 19.6 | 81.90% | 33.15% | 32.14% | 54.29% | 43.65% | 5.5 | | 30 | 28.6 | 82.10% | 24.68% | 24.05% | 46.84% | 34.66% | 6.2 | | 40 | 37.3 | 82.70% | 20.41% | 19.36% | 41.83% | 29.59% | 6.7 | | 50 | 45.8 | 82.50% | 16.84% | 15.66% | 36.84% | 23.86% | 7.0 | with 1000 nodes, uniform distribution in a square, "unit graph" and with: - NeiCe : expected #neighbor of a central node - AvgNei: avg number of neighbors on all the nodes - AllMPR: % of nodes which are MPR of some other node - DomSet: % of nodes in the MPR-based dominating set - MPRFlood: % of retransmitters in an MPR flooding - LO flood: % of retransmitters in an MPR flooding when "logical order" is used (the algorithm given above) - LO+flood: same as before, but with jitter delay proportional to node ID (and no longer random). - Avg#MPR: average number of MPR per node Notes: . LO+flood, is using the idea that the jitter delay can be a function of the node ID. Now, it can be a function of hop count, node ID, sender node ID, etc... . I did not test the following optimisation: if a node scheduled a retransmission, and is now waiting for the jitter delay to expire, but now if it receives the same message coming from a node with lower ID than the MPR selector which caused the scheduling retransmission, the node could cancel the retransmission. I hope it might be of some interest to you, and I didn't flood you with irrelevant technical details... Best regards, -- Cedric On Wednesday 25 February 2004 21:00, Richard Ogier wrote: > Charlie and all, > > The discussion we had regarding the flooding method you > are suggesting can be found here > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/manet/2002-09.mail > > Search for "Cedric", who ran the simulations. > > Here is what Philippe Jacquet said about the approach: > > Richard, > > > > If you mean to include all MPR nodes in the dominating set, we have > > already > > > thought about it sometimes ago. We gave up this idea because it creates > > much > > > too large dominating sets (almost all nodes involved). > > > > Philippe > > As Joe suggests, it is possible to reduce the size of the CDS by making > the MPR sets overlap more, e.g., by preferring min ID neighbors as MPRs. > In the extreme case, each step of the MPR selection algorithm selects > the min ID neighbor that covers some 2-hop neighbor that is not yet > covered. In this case, you don't even use degree, and thus it becomes > possible for nodes to select *themselves* as MPRs or CDS nodes. > (This is similar to how nodes select themselves as MPRs in TBRPF.) > > Having nodes select themselves as CDS nodes may also help reliability > and robustness, since a node can select itself immediately as a CDS > node following a link failure. It would be nice to have simulation results > that measure how much this improves performance. > > Richard > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles E. Perkins" > To: "Richard Ogier" > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:37 AM > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > Hello Richard, > > > > Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > to our terminology. > > > > The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > packet as already processed. > > > > This can be accomplished by modifying step 5.2 > > to read as follows: > > > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any of its neighbors, and if the > > time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- > > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- > > sage reduced by one. > > > > I must admit that I have only been puzzling over your > > observation for a little while, so I might have missed > > something. But even without the problem you raised, > > this approach would be better for two reasons: > > - Reduced broadcast latency, and > > - Better robustness when the MPR selector's local > > (typically unreliable!) broadcast is lost for some reason. > > Lastly, I think I like this approach because I seem to > > remember wanting to put it in a long time ago and I just > > forgot to do so. > > > > Regards, > > Charlie P. > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > Here is an example where the MPRF protocol does not work. > > > (Although it can be fixed as explained below.) > > > > > > 8 > > > / \ > > > 2-----5 > > > / \ / \ > > > / \ / \ > > > 1 / 7 > > > \ / \ / > > > \ / \ / > > > 3-----6 > > > \ / > > > 9 > > > > > > Node 1 is the source (originator of flooded packets), > > > and its MPRs are nodes 2 and 3. > > > Node 2 selects node 6 as MPR (to cover 3, 7, and 9) > > > Node 3 selects node 5 as MPR (to cover 2, 7, and 8). > > > > > > Node 1 originates a packet, which is relayed by nodes 2 and 3. > > > Suppose node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, then from node 3. > > > Suppose node 6 receives the packet first from node 3, then from node 2. > > > (I explain below how this is possible.) > > > Since node 2 is not an MPR selector of node 5, node 5 does not relay > > > the packet when it is received from node 2, but creates an entry > > > in the Flooding History (step 5.1 in the draft). > > > Then, when node 5 receives the packet from node 3 (its MPR selector), > > > node 5 ignores the packet (step 2 in the draft). > > > Therefore, node 5 does not relay the packet. > > > Similarly, node 6 does not relay the packet. > > > Therefore, node 7 never receives the packet. > > > > > > I think the solution is for each node to remember > > > which flooded packets it has already transmitted. > > > If a node receives a flooded packet from an MPR selector, > > > and has not yet transmitted the same packet, then it > > > should relay the packet. > > > > > > I think the same problem exists in > > > draft-spagnolo-manet-ospf-wireless-interface-00 > > > > > > I can think of 3 situations that can result in the > > > above example (in which node 5 receives the packet first from > > > node 2, and node 6 receives the packet first from node 3): > > > > > > 1. Very long propagation delays. > > > 2. As stated in the Introduction of the draft, link layer > > > broadcast can be accomplished using iterated unicast. > > > 3. If the flooded packet is sent reliably to all neighbors using > > > ACKs with retransmissions, then the first transmission from > > > node 2 (resp. 3) might be received only by node 5 (resp. 6). > > > > > > Regards, > > > Richard > > > > > > P.S. Regarding the terms "reflood" and "retransmit". > > > > > > "Reflood" means to flood the packet again to all nodes. > > > RFC 2328 for OSPF uses this term correctly, but some > > > people have recently used it to mean "relay". > > > > > > "Retransmit" means for the same node to transmit the packet again, > > > usually because an ACK was not received. > > > It will be very confusing when we talk about reliable flooding > > > with ACKs, if we use the word "retransmit" to mean both > > > retransmission from the same node, and relaying a packet > > > received from another node. > > > > > > When talking about a node relaying a packet, I suggest using > > > either the term "relay" or "transmit". > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > manet mailing list > > > manet@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Feb 25 22:16:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA01974 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:16:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwC0S-0008WH-9c for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:16:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1Q3GCTL032743 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:16:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwC0S-0008W2-4g for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:16:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA01961 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:16:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwC0O-0002ID-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:16:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBzR-0002DV-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:15:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwByU-00029Q-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:14:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwByL-0008Ck-Q6; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:14:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwBxY-00081Q-EY for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:13:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA01914 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:13:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBxV-00025D-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:13:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBwb-00021a-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:12:14 -0500 Received: from note.orchestra.cse.unsw.edu.au ([129.94.242.24] ident=root) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwBwI-0001xi-00 for manet@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:11:54 -0500 Received: From 192.168.0.100 ([129.94.173.78] == sitcrc.cse.unsw.EDU.AU) (for ) (for ) (for ) By note With Smtp ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:11:46 +1100 From: Justin Lipman To: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:11:45 +1100 Reply-To: justin@titr.uow.edu.au Organization: CRC-SIT Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF and "reliability" considerations User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <403D1576.97F72C27@iprg.nokia.com> <028c01c3fbfa$17649790$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> In-Reply-To: <028c01c3fbfa$17649790$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> Cc: "Charles E. Perkins" , "Richard Ogier" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402261411.45863.justin@titr.uow.edu.au> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, I wonder if there has been some consideration as to the performance of=20 optimised flooding mechanisms in the presence of background traffic.=20 =46rom my own simulations results in Glomosim... MPR and other optimised=20 flooding mechanisms performed very badly as increasing CBR background traff= ic=20 was introduced, especially compared to Blind flooding. This makes their use= =20 very limited.=20 The following is a paper on reliable optimised flooding that shows some=20 results for MPR, LMST, Blind flooding vs a more reliable version of LMST th= at=20 uses unicast packet transmission instead of broadcast packet transmission. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~justinl/rmst.pdf Kind regards, Justin =2D-=20 Research Associate Smart Internet Technology Cooperative Research Centre http://www.titr.uow.edu.au/~justin On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:09 am, Richard Ogier wrote: > Charlie, > > Suppose that each MPR is a guaranteed relay as you say: > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > Then the nodes that relay the packet are the MPRs of the originator, > the MPRs of the MPRs of the originator, etc. > > However, I don't think this set of nodes includes every node that > is an MPR of some neighboring MPR (as in your > modified step 5.2). The difference is that there has to be > a sequence of nodes u_1,..., u_n where u_n is the originator > and each node is an MPR of the next node in the sequence. > The difference is that the sequence must lead to the originator, > and it might not. > > I will have additional suggestions soon. > > Regards, > Richard > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles E. Perkins" > To: "Richard Ogier" > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:36 PM > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > Hello Richard, > > > > I did go back and look over the discussion that > > you cited. It was very interesting work. I have > > some further comments. > > > > I suppose I have been assuming that the MPRs > > themselves form a connected dominating set. > > This provides assurance that a message > > transmitted by all MPRs goes everywhere. > > I believe this assumption is justified by > > the selection algorithm. > > > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > > > My suggested change amounts to a "premature" > > scheduling of this guaranteed relay operation. > > In other words, I _claim_ that it "cannot" produce > > _more_ transmissions, if the MPR selector itself > > is an MPR. > > > > If my _claim_ is correct, then I can't see how > > Cedric's simulations would show that more packets > > were sent. Perhaps the aforementioned step 5.2 > > needs one further refinement: > > > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any neighboring MPR, and if the > > time to live of the message is greater than '1', the mes- > > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the mes- > > sage reduced by one. > > > > If my claim is incorrect, it would be very > > helpful for me if you might explain why. > > > > Regards, > > Charlie P. > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about > > > a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that > > > it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case > > > about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). > > > So let's not forget about efficiency. > > > > > > There are several other methods that avoid having to know > > > the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen > > > or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a flooded > > > packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, > > > or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing > > > several of these via simulations and will announce the results > > > in a few weeks. > > > > > > Richard > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Joe Macker" > > > To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" > > > > > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM > > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revisi= on > > > > > > > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > > >Hello Richard, > > > > > > > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > > > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > > > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > > > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > > > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > > > >to our terminology. > > > > > > > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > > > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > > > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > > > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > > > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > > > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > > > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > > > >packet as already processed. > > > > > > > > Charlie: > > > > > > > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > > > > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not required. > > > > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > > > > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > > > > > > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > > > > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET > > > > forwarding). We are presently examining its robustness and > > > > performance in a few scenarios against other more stateful > > > > approaches. > > > > > > > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just busy > > > > implementing things. > > > > > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > manet mailing list > > > > manet@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 02:00:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10987 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:00:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwFVM-0008JN-56 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:00:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1Q70Kcg031887 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:00:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwFVL-0008F9-AC for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:00:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10395 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:00:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwFVH-0007Ep-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:00:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwFUI-00077a-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:59:15 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwFTJ-0006zz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:58:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwFT8-0007f5-MV; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:58:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwFSa-0007dk-Ho for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:57:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA10127 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:57:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwFSX-0006xD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:57:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwFRg-0006ru-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:56:33 -0500 Received: from bay12-f23.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.23] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwFRG-0006jq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:56:06 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:55:36 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:55:36 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:25:36 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2004 06:55:36.0846 (UTC) FILETIME=[8998BAE0:01C3FC35] Subject: [manet] Tora Traces After Simulation showing zeo end-to-end throughput Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Dear all, I have done simulations on NS2 with TORA routing protocol. and got traces of it with simulation environment 1000x1000 m, mobility at 1 m/s, cbr traffic with 100 sources. the script which i used to find end-to-end throughput for DSDV AODV and DSR protocol i applied it to the TORA tarces. the result i got is 0. is it possible. or my script is wrong? or May be there is another method to find throughput in TORA. Please help. I am in urgent need of the analysis of the Protocol. Thanx in Advance. ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ All the news that matters. All the gossip from home. http://www.msn.co.in/NRI/ Specially for NRIs! _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 09:58:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA17101 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:58:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwMxZ-0003yO-Jy for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:58:05 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QEvvfv015271 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:57:57 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwMxZ-0003yE-Fx for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:57:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA17081 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:57:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwMxX-0002kD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:57:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwMwX-0002cY-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:56:55 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwMvu-0002VJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:56:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwMvk-0003ZL-1D; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:56:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwMvV-0003WL-Cm for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:55:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA16896 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:55:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwMvT-0002R7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:55:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwMub-0002IT-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:54:54 -0500 Received: from 66-152-29-4.ded.btitelecom.net ([66.152.29.4] helo=mail.scires.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwMtk-00022Q-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:54:01 -0500 Received: from SRCATL-MTA by mail.scires.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:50:40 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.3 Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:50:21 -0500 From: "Pete Sholander" To: , Cc: , Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF and "reliability" considerations Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Justin, Good point in general. Large amounts of user traffic can crowd out = routing protocol messages. =20 However, can't this be solved in deployed MANETs via network-layer and = link-layer techniques that give routing-control traffic some level of = priority? Examples are DiffServ and IEEE 802.11p. (Note: in my old age, = I forget which letter was per-frame prioritization. So, "p" may be = wrong!?) Did you try those techniques in GloMoSim? --Pete Sholander Atlanta, GA >>> Justin Lipman 02/25/04 10:11PM >>> Hi all, I wonder if there has been some consideration as to the performance of=20 optimised flooding mechanisms in the presence of background traffic.=20 >From my own simulations results in Glomosim... MPR and other optimised=20 flooding mechanisms performed very badly as increasing CBR background = traffic=20 was introduced, especially compared to Blind flooding. This makes their = use=20 very limited.=20 The following is a paper on reliable optimised flooding that shows some=20 results for MPR, LMST, Blind flooding vs a more reliable version of LMST = that=20 uses unicast packet transmission instead of broadcast packet transmission. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~justinl/rmst.pdf=20 Kind regards, Justin --=20 Research Associate Smart Internet Technology Cooperative Research Centre http://www.titr.uow.edu.au/~justin=20 On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:09 am, Richard Ogier wrote: > Charlie, > > Suppose that each MPR is a guaranteed relay as you say: > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > Then the nodes that relay the packet are the MPRs of the originator, > the MPRs of the MPRs of the originator, etc. > > However, I don't think this set of nodes includes every node that > is an MPR of some neighboring MPR (as in your > modified step 5.2). The difference is that there has to be > a sequence of nodes u_1,..., u_n where u_n is the originator > and each node is an MPR of the next node in the sequence. > The difference is that the sequence must lead to the originator, > and it might not. > > I will have additional suggestions soon. > > Regards, > Richard > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles E. Perkins" > To: "Richard Ogier" > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:36 PM > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > Hello Richard, > > > > I did go back and look over the discussion that > > you cited. It was very interesting work. I have > > some further comments. > > > > I suppose I have been assuming that the MPRs > > themselves form a connected dominating set. > > This provides assurance that a message > > transmitted by all MPRs goes everywhere. > > I believe this assumption is justified by > > the selection algorithm. > > > > Suppose that an MPR is taken as a "guaranteed" > > relay for a flooded message. By that, I mean the > > node _will_ transmit a flooded message if that > > flooded message is sent by its MPR selector. > > > > My suggested change amounts to a "premature" > > scheduling of this guaranteed relay operation. > > In other words, I _claim_ that it "cannot" produce > > _more_ transmissions, if the MPR selector itself > > is an MPR. > > > > If my _claim_ is correct, then I can't see how > > Cedric's simulations would show that more packets > > were sent. Perhaps the aforementioned step 5.2 > > needs one further refinement: > > > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any neighboring MPR, and if the > > time to live of the message is greater than '1', the = mes- > > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of the = mes- > > sage reduced by one. > > > > If my claim is incorrect, it would be very > > helpful for me if you might explain why. > > > > Regards, > > Charlie P. > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > Yes, I recall that this method was discussed on the list about > > > a year ago, and Cedric ran some simulations showing that > > > it resulted in a large number of transmissions (in one case > > > about 50% of the nodes transmitted a given flooded packet). > > > So let's not forget about efficiency. > > > > > > There are several other methods that avoid having to know > > > the previous hop, including one suggested by Thomas Clausen > > > or Philippe Jacquet about a year ago in which a node relays a = flooded > > > packet if and only if the minimum ID neighbor is an MPR selector, > > > or the node has smaller ID than all neighbors. I am comparing > > > several of these via simulations and will announce the results > > > in a few weeks. > > > > > > Richard > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Joe Macker" > > > To: "Charles E. Perkins" ; "Richard Ogier" > > > > > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:43 AM > > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial = revision > > > > > > > At 12:37 PM 2/25/2004, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > > > > >Hello Richard, > > > > > > > > > >Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > > > >with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > > > >times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > > > >discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > > > >through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > > > >to our terminology. > > > > > > > > > >The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > > > >situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > > > >packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > > > >that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > > > > > >If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > > > >neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > > > >packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > > > >packet as already processed. > > > > > > > > Charlie: > > > > > > > > Several of us have been talking about and actually implementing > > > > that for quite awhile. The previous hop state is also not = required. > > > > The election heuristics can also be tweaked in simple ways > > > > to have more common or less common MPR sets. > > > > > > > > We have this MPR-F option functional in a > > > > working implementation (providing generic multicast MANET > > > > forwarding). We are presently examining its robustness and > > > > performance in a few scenarios against other more stateful > > > > approaches. > > > > > > > > I must confess I haven't read the ID in detail yet, we're just = busy > > > > implementing things. > > > > > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > manet mailing list > > > > manet@ietf.org=20 > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet=20 > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org=20 > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet=20 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org=20 https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 12:00:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24425 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:00:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwOrb-0005tv-UJ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:59:56 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QGxtVq022682 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:59:55 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwOrb-0005tl-Ne for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:59:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24365 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:59:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwOra-0001PJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:59:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwOqL-0001AT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:58:39 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwOpL-0000wW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:57:35 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwOoo-0005OO-Tx; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwOoh-0005L9-9U for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:56:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24114 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:56:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwOof-0000oF-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:56:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwOnl-0000dx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:55:58 -0500 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.62]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwOmq-0000Vh-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:55:00 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-021castocp0014.dialsprint.net ([65.178.80.14] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AwOmn-0000C6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 08:54:57 -0800 Message-ID: <403E250A.4090507@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 08:55:38 -0800 From: Richard Ogier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The INRIA simulation study that Cedric pointed to is interesting and should be useful in helping to decide which way to go. I will try to summarize how those results (and Cedric's message) relate to our discussion of the last few days. First, the CDS that Charlie has been suggesting, i.e., the set of all MPR nodes, is found to include about 80% of the nodes in the INRIA report. But the "guaranteed" MPR forwarding rule that requires a node to relay any packet that is received from an MPR selector, is also very inefficient (according to my own simulations), and the MPR forwarding rule assumed in the INRIA report is much more efficient - the packet is relayed only if the *first* neighbor it was received from is an MPR selector. As I pointed out, and (not surprisingly) INRIA knew a long time ago, the "first arrival" rule does not always work (which makes me wonder why it was in the MPRF draft). Cedric agrees with me that my suggestion to use the rule involving the pair (TTL, neighbor address) is an efficient solution to this problem, and (not surprisingly) INRIA already thought of this rule without the TTL. I think the use of TTL is necessary to make the flooding as efficient as the "first arrival" rule. But this solution does not really address Charlie's concern regarding reliability, and the desire to have a forwarding rule that is independent of the previous hop. Now, the *efficient* CDS used in the INRIA report is defined as follows. A node decides that it is in the connected dominating set if: Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. This is certainly an efficient way to make the forwarding rule independent of the previous hop, but it does not provide min-hop paths (using only CDS nodes as intermediate nodes) and therefore is probably not very useful for route discovery in AODV. Maybe I am wrong about this. Also, the INRIA report considers two methods for selecting MPRs: the greedy algorithm (as in OLSR), and the min ID algorithm. The min ID algorithm allows nodes to select themselves as MPRs (similar to TBRPF), and therefore has some advantages, although it results in more transmissions (and a larger CDS). In summary, maybe a combination of the methods discussed above is a good solution, but I am still looking for a better solution. Regards, Richard > Hello everyone, > > Sorry to jump in this discussion which I didn't follow, but my filter > detected > a reference to my name :-) > > Regarding the MPR flooding, the MPR retransmission problem was known: > the MPR flooding proof, found, for instance in INRIA RR 4260, pages 8-9. > (http://www.inria.fr/rrrt/rr-4260.html) implicitly relies on a total > order of > transmissions (by considering the "first" transmission). > This assumption is reasonnable on a single channel interface. > When you have multiple interfaces each respecting this assumption, > a proven MPR flooding algorithm is the one found in the OLSR RFC. > > Then, long ago, we thought of the same idea independantly found by > Richard, > of using a "global order" on packets to retransmit, that is: > - retransmit a packet iff > . it has not been retransmitted > . and it has been just received from an MPR selector > . and it had been received only from nodes with greater ID than > the MPR selector (or never been received). > > I note that Richard added the very interesting novelty of using TTL > in the ordering which would improve results. > > [Note also, that if the only reason messages cannot be ordered, is > because they are repeated on a link, then you can use the > "retransmission count", to order them, if this information is available.] > > Now for some results: > > Some simulations results for the Dominating Set based on MPR are > available in INRIA Research Report 4597 > (http://www.inria.fr/rrrt/rr-4597.html). > The important result is that the performance of dominating set based on > MPRs, is very close to the performance of MPR flooding (see figure 6). > This is expected. > > Some simulations results (some unpublished) we had are the following: > |NeiCe| AvgNei | AllMPR | DomSet |MPRFlood|LO flood|LO+flood|Avg#MPR| > | 7 | 7.6 | 67.30% | 54.24% | 48.48% | 56.05% | 53.59% | 3.1 | > | 8 | 8.4 | 72.70% | 54.52% | 50.90% | 60.98% | 57.31% | 3.5 | > | 10 | 10.3 | 75.10% | 50.43% | 47.55% | 59.99% | 54.80% | 4.1 | > | 12 | 12.2 | 79.30% | 46.74% | 44.84% | 61.35% | 54.33% | 4.6 | > | 15 | 15.0 | 80.20% | 40.05% | 38.35% | 57.31% | 48.41% | 4.9 | > | 20 | 19.6 | 81.90% | 33.15% | 32.14% | 54.29% | 43.65% | 5.5 | > | 30 | 28.6 | 82.10% | 24.68% | 24.05% | 46.84% | 34.66% | 6.2 | > | 40 | 37.3 | 82.70% | 20.41% | 19.36% | 41.83% | 29.59% | 6.7 | > | 50 | 45.8 | 82.50% | 16.84% | 15.66% | 36.84% | 23.86% | 7.0 | > > with 1000 nodes, uniform distribution in a square, "unit graph" > and with: > - NeiCe : expected #neighbor of a central node > - AvgNei: avg number of neighbors on all the nodes > - AllMPR: % of nodes which are MPR of some other node > - DomSet: % of nodes in the MPR-based dominating set > - MPRFlood: % of retransmitters in an MPR flooding > - LO flood: % of retransmitters in an MPR flooding when > "logical order" is used (the algorithm given above) > - LO+flood: same as before, but with jitter delay > proportional to node ID (and no longer random). > - Avg#MPR: average number of MPR per node > > Notes: > . LO+flood, is using the idea that the jitter delay can be > a function of the node ID. Now, it can be a function of hop count, > node ID, sender node ID, etc... > . I did not test the following optimisation: if a node scheduled a > retransmission, and is now waiting for the jitter delay to > expire, but now if it receives the same message coming > from a node with lower ID than the MPR selector which caused > the scheduling retransmission, the node could cancel the > retransmission. > > I hope it might be of some interest to you, and I didn't > flood you with irrelevant technical details... > > Best regards, > -- Cedric > > On Wednesday 25 February 2004 21:00, Richard Ogier wrote: > > Charlie and all, > > > > The discussion we had regarding the flooding method you > > are suggesting can be found here > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/manet/2002-09.mail > > > > Search for "Cedric", who ran the simulations. > > > > Here is what Philippe Jacquet said about the approach: > > > Richard, > > > > > > If you mean to include all MPR nodes in the dominating set, we have > > > > already > > > > > thought about it sometimes ago. We gave up this idea because it > creates > > > > much > > > > > too large dominating sets (almost all nodes involved). > > > > > > Philippe > > > > As Joe suggests, it is possible to reduce the size of the CDS by making > > the MPR sets overlap more, e.g., by preferring min ID neighbors as MPRs. > > In the extreme case, each step of the MPR selection algorithm selects > > the min ID neighbor that covers some 2-hop neighbor that is not yet > > covered. In this case, you don't even use degree, and thus it becomes > > possible for nodes to select *themselves* as MPRs or CDS nodes. > > (This is similar to how nodes select themselves as MPRs in TBRPF.) > > > > Having nodes select themselves as CDS nodes may also help reliability > > and robustness, since a node can select itself immediately as a CDS > > node following a link failure. It would be nice to have simulation > results > > that measure how much this improves performance. > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Charles E. Perkins" > > To: "Richard Ogier" > > Cc: "Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group" > > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:37 AM > > Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision > > > > > Hello Richard, > > > > > > Taking your suggestions out of order, I'd first agree > > > with your proposed terminology. I have noticed many > > > times that the terminology surrounding the flooding > > > discussion can be very confusing. I will try to go > > > through the MPRF draft to make the indicated revisions > > > to our terminology. > > > > > > The example you give is, I think, applicable to other > > > situations where an MPR node receives a flooded > > > packet from other neighbors first. It seems to me > > > that a very simple fix would work, though. > > > > > > If a MPR node receives a flooded packet from ANY > > > neighbor, it should go ahead and transmit the > > > packet again to its neighbors, and mark the > > > packet as already processed. > > > > > > This can be accomplished by modifying step 5.2 > > > to read as follows: > > > > > > 5.2 If this node is MPR for any of its neighbors, and > if the > > > time to live of the message is greater than '1', > the mes- > > > sage MUST be forwarded according to the following by > > > broadcasting it on all interfaces that have symmetric > > > neighbors other than the sender, with the TTL of > the mes- > > > sage reduced by one. > > > > > > I must admit that I have only been puzzling over your > > > observation for a little while, so I might have missed > > > something. But even without the problem you raised, > > > this approach would be better for two reasons: > > > - Reduced broadcast latency, and > > > - Better robustness when the MPR selector's local > > > (typically unreliable!) broadcast is lost for some reason. > > > Lastly, I think I like this approach because I seem to > > > remember wanting to put it in a long time ago and I just > > > forgot to do so. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Charlie P. > > > > > > Richard Ogier wrote: > > > > Here is an example where the MPRF protocol does not work. > > > > (Although it can be fixed as explained below.) > > > > > > > > 8 > > > > / \ > > > > 2-----5 > > > > / \ / \ > > > > / \ / \ > > > > 1 / 7 > > > > \ / \ / > > > > \ / \ / > > > > 3-----6 > > > > \ / > > > > 9 > > > > > > > > Node 1 is the source (originator of flooded packets), > > > > and its MPRs are nodes 2 and 3. > > > > Node 2 selects node 6 as MPR (to cover 3, 7, and 9) > > > > Node 3 selects node 5 as MPR (to cover 2, 7, and 8). > > > > > > > > Node 1 originates a packet, which is relayed by nodes 2 and 3. > > > > Suppose node 5 receives the packet first from node 2, then from > node 3. > > > > Suppose node 6 receives the packet first from node 3, then from > node 2. > > > > (I explain below how this is possible.) > > > > Since node 2 is not an MPR selector of node 5, node 5 does not relay > > > > the packet when it is received from node 2, but creates an entry > > > > in the Flooding History (step 5.1 in the draft). > > > > Then, when node 5 receives the packet from node 3 (its MPR > selector), > > > > node 5 ignores the packet (step 2 in the draft). > > > > Therefore, node 5 does not relay the packet. > > > > Similarly, node 6 does not relay the packet. > > > > Therefore, node 7 never receives the packet. > > > > > > > > I think the solution is for each node to remember > > > > which flooded packets it has already transmitted. > > > > If a node receives a flooded packet from an MPR selector, > > > > and has not yet transmitted the same packet, then it > > > > should relay the packet. > > > > > > > > I think the same problem exists in > > > > draft-spagnolo-manet-ospf-wireless-interface-00 > > > > > > > > I can think of 3 situations that can result in the > > > > above example (in which node 5 receives the packet first from > > > > node 2, and node 6 receives the packet first from node 3): > > > > > > > > 1. Very long propagation delays. > > > > 2. As stated in the Introduction of the draft, link layer > > > > broadcast can be accomplished using iterated unicast. > > > > 3. If the flooded packet is sent reliably to all neighbors using > > > > ACKs with retransmissions, then the first transmission from > > > > node 2 (resp. 3) might be received only by node 5 (resp. 6). > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > P.S. Regarding the terms "reflood" and "retransmit". > > > > > > > > "Reflood" means to flood the packet again to all nodes. > > > > RFC 2328 for OSPF uses this term correctly, but some > > > > people have recently used it to mean "relay". > > > > > > > > "Retransmit" means for the same node to transmit the packet again, > > > > usually because an ACK was not received. > > > > It will be very confusing when we talk about reliable flooding > > > > with ACKs, if we use the word "retransmit" to mean both > > > > retransmission from the same node, and relaying a packet > > > > received from another node. > > > > > > > > When talking about a node relaying a packet, I suggest using > > > > either the term "relay" or "transmit". > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > manet mailing list > > > > manet@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 12:53:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29316 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:53:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPgl-0003gJ-Id for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:52:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QHqlg4014150 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:52:47 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPgl-0003g9-7U for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:52:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29310 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:52:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPgj-0007P2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:52:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPfl-0007Iz-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:51:46 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPfG-0007Du-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:51:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPf5-0003Ot-Gb; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPel-0003Nu-Is for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:50:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29260 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:50:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPej-0007D7-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:50:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPdt-00078Y-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:49:49 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPdK-00071y-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:49:14 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1QHmfO05943; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:48:41 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402261748> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdEAf9mh; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:48:39 PST Message-ID: <403E316D.1542C37E@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:48:29 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Ogier CC: Mobile Ad Hoc IETF working group Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403118FC.79B8305B@iprg.nokia.com> <40311DC6.5A2BE2DB@iprg.nokia.com> <40378B93.5040607@erg.sri.com> <403CDD75.A88D90CA@iprg.nokia.com> <6.0.3.0.2.20040225132245.02c9f548@pop.itd.nrl.navy.mil> <000b01c3fbd3$bfd4a040$0d81bb3f@Panoramic> <403D15 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Richard, If the MPR algorithm works, it has the following property: For any node X, if X floods a packet, then the packet is transmitted to every other node in the network either by X or by some MPR in the MPR tree rooted at X. So, away from node X, and under the assumption that flooding works algorithmically, the task is to get the MPRs to transmit packets to their neighbors. Another way to say this is that, assuming a correct selection algorithm, we get flooding if every MPR transmits the flooded packet once (disregarding errors). Since I claim that my suggestion still fulfills this condition, I believe it still is correct. And, since we are "expecting" one transmission from each MPR, I believe also that it does not increase the number of expected transmissions. To your point: Richard Ogier wrote: > ... the nodes that relay the packet are the MPRs of the originator, > the MPRs of the MPRs of the originator, etc. Check. > However, I don't think this set of nodes includes every node that > is an MPR of some neighboring MPR (as in your > modified step 5.2). I believe this set includes all MPRs in the dominating set which is the MPR tree rooted at the originator of the packet -- otherwise the algorithm is broken. > The difference is that there has to be > a sequence of nodes u_1,..., u_n where u_n is the originator > and each node is an MPR of the next node in the sequence. > The difference is that the sequence must lead to the originator, > and it might not. Look at it the other way around, and it's easier to see. The originator has one or more MPRs. Every node has one or more MPRs, including all MPRs in the MPR tree rooted at the originator of the packet. Every MPR tree forms a connected dominating set. If these statements are incorrect, then I believe the algorithm is broken. However, I believe the statements are in fact correct, and thus it is impossible to identify a scenario in which no sequence ever leads back to the originator. What's needed is proof, I guess, and not intuition. For that, I reckon I need to read the Inria research report. But some kind soul may reproduce the proof for us here, who can tell? Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 13:09:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00304 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:09:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPwU-0005Zn-M6 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:09:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QI92QH021429 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:09:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPwU-0005ZY-E5 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:09:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00296 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:08:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPwS-0001oP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:09:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPvT-0001hO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:07:59 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPuq-0001aQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:07:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPuZ-0004vS-2E; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:07:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwPuT-0004uD-1q for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:06:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00232 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:06:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPuR-0001ZO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:06:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPtX-0001TS-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:06:00 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwPt6-0001Kt-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:05:32 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1QI4xR00694; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:04:59 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402261804> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdDi7uOE; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:04:57 PST Message-ID: <403E353F.7B2B0389@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:04:47 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Ogier CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403E250A.4090507@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Richard, Richard Ogier wrote: > First, the CDS that Charlie has been suggesting, i.e., the > set of all MPR nodes, is found to include about 80% of the > nodes in the INRIA report. On the other hand, the number of MPRs selected by a node is always far less than the number of neighbors for a node. > But the "guaranteed" MPR forwarding rule that requires a node > to relay any packet that is received from an MPR selector, > is also very inefficient (according to my own simulations), > and the MPR forwarding rule assumed in the INRIA report > is much more efficient - the packet is relayed only if the > *first* neighbor it was received from is an MPR selector. O.K. I am convinced that I have to re-think this. It means that many MPRs are _not_ on the MPR tree rooted at the source of a packet, which I guess I should have realized before. It would be bad to make MPRs remember which source trees they are on (as opposed to just which neighbors they serve). > But this solution does not really address Charlie's concern > regarding reliability, and the desire to have a forwarding rule > that is independent of the previous hop. > > Now, the *efficient* CDS used in the INRIA report is defined as follows. > A node decides that it is in the connected dominating set if: > Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, > Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. > > This is certainly an efficient way to make the forwarding rule > independent of the previous hop, but it does not provide > min-hop paths (using only CDS nodes as intermediate nodes) > and therefore is probably not very useful for route discovery > in AODV. Maybe I am wrong about this. I reckon that the advantages of reduced congestion from flooding can, in many circumstances, outweigh the advantages of discoverying minimum-hop paths. Plus, it matters how far away from minimum the CDS paths are, on average. Do you happen to have statistics for that? Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 13:31:20 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01088 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:31:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQHc-0006pP-9F for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:30:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QIUq2R026243 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:30:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQHc-0006pC-5D for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:30:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01073 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:30:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQHa-0003nS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:30:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQGh-0003hC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:29:56 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQG5-0003at-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:29:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQFq-0006UV-1G; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:29:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQFk-0006U0-Gz for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:28:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01000 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:28:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQFi-0003Zq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:28:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQEk-0003UW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:27:54 -0500 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.46]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQEP-0003P4-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:27:33 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-019castocp0442.dialsprint.net ([65.178.65.188] helo=earthlink.net) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AwQEH-0005aa-00; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:27:26 -0800 Message-ID: <403E3AB6.4010807@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:28:06 -0800 From: Richard Ogier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Charles E. Perkins" CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403E250A.4090507@earthlink.net> <403E353F.7B2B0389@iprg.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <403E353F.7B2B0389@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Charlie, Here is an example that shows not all MPRs are on the MPR "tree" rooted at the originator (although I see that you are now convinced of this): 2-----5 /|\ /|\ / | \ / | \ 1 | / | 7 \ | / \ | / \|/ \|/ 3-----6 Node 1 is the originator. MPR of 1 is 3. MPR of 3 is 6. MPR of 7 is 5. MPR of 5 is 2. Of course, nodes 3 and 6 relay the packet sent by 1. But according to your modified step 5.2, node 2 also relays the packet, since 2 is an MPR of 3, which is an MPR of 5 (which is an MPR of 7, which is not an MPR of any neighbor). Here is a quick idea that will result in a smaller CDS and will solve all of the concerns. The idea is to combine the "first arrival" rule with INRIA's CDS. Thus a node forwards a received flooded packet if: Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. Rule 3: or it is an MPR of the first neighbor from which the packet was received. Rule 3 can be dropped if the node cannot determine the previous hop. so this combination of rules works in all cases. I see only two possible drawbacks: 1. A larger number of nodes transmit each packet (although much less than the CDS consisting of all MPRs). 2. If nodes cannot determine the previous hop, then the packet may be flooded along paths that are not (nearly) min-hop. Again, this is just a quick thought, probably not the best solution. Regards, Richard Charles E. Perkins wrote: >Hello Richard, > >Richard Ogier wrote: > > > >>First, the CDS that Charlie has been suggesting, i.e., the >>set of all MPR nodes, is found to include about 80% of the >>nodes in the INRIA report. >> >> > >On the other hand, the number of MPRs selected by a node is >always far less than the number of neighbors for a node. > > > >>But the "guaranteed" MPR forwarding rule that requires a node >>to relay any packet that is received from an MPR selector, >>is also very inefficient (according to my own simulations), >>and the MPR forwarding rule assumed in the INRIA report >>is much more efficient - the packet is relayed only if the >>*first* neighbor it was received from is an MPR selector. >> >> > >O.K. I am convinced that I have to re-think this. It means >that many MPRs are _not_ on the MPR tree rooted at the source >of a packet, which I guess I should have realized before. >It would be bad to make MPRs remember which source trees >they are on (as opposed to just which neighbors they serve). > > > >>But this solution does not really address Charlie's concern >>regarding reliability, and the desire to have a forwarding rule >>that is independent of the previous hop. >> >>Now, the *efficient* CDS used in the INRIA report is defined as follows. >>A node decides that it is in the connected dominating set if: >>Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, >>Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. >> >>This is certainly an efficient way to make the forwarding rule >>independent of the previous hop, but it does not provide >>min-hop paths (using only CDS nodes as intermediate nodes) >>and therefore is probably not very useful for route discovery >>in AODV. Maybe I am wrong about this. >> >> > >I reckon that the advantages of reduced congestion from >flooding can, in many circumstances, outweigh the advantages >of discoverying minimum-hop paths. Plus, it matters >how far away from minimum the CDS paths are, on average. >Do you happen to have statistics for that? > >Regards, >Charlie P. > > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 13:37:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01274 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:37:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQNP-0007gi-9E for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:36:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QIap88029546 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:36:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQNP-0007gT-3u for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:36:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01253 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:36:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQNM-0004QM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:36:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQMQ-0004KI-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:35:51 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQLw-0004Ea-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:35:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQLf-0007AJ-Ph; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwQLT-00078v-Jz for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:34:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01216 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:34:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQLR-0004EE-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:34:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQKU-000494-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:33:51 -0500 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.46]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwQKA-00043J-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:33:30 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-019castocp0442.dialsprint.net ([65.178.65.188] helo=earthlink.net) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AwQK7-00071U-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:33:28 -0800 Message-ID: <403E3C20.30507@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:34:08 -0800 From: Richard Ogier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF [flooding protocol] document initial revision References: <403E250A.4090507@earthlink.net> <403E353F.7B2B0389@iprg.nokia.com> <403E3AB6.4010807@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <403E3AB6.4010807@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A correction to my example: Of course, nodes 3 and 6 relay the packet sent by 1. But according to your modified step 5.2, node 2 also relays the packet, since 2 is an MPR of 5 (which is an MPR of 7, which is not an MPR of any neighbor). Regards, Richard Richard Ogier wrote: > Charlie, > > Here is an example that shows not all MPRs are on the MPR "tree" > rooted at the originator (although I see that you are now convinced of > this): > > 2-----5 > /|\ /|\ > / | \ / | \ > 1 | / | 7 > \ | / \ | / > \|/ \|/ > 3-----6 > > Node 1 is the originator. > MPR of 1 is 3. > MPR of 3 is 6. > MPR of 7 is 5. > MPR of 5 is 2. > > Of course, nodes 3 and 6 relay the packet sent by 1. > But according to your modified step 5.2, node 2 also > relays the packet, since 2 is an MPR of 3, which is > an MPR of 5 (which is an MPR of 7, which is not an MPR > of any neighbor). > > Here is a quick idea that will result in a smaller CDS > and will solve all of the concerns. > The idea is to combine the "first arrival" rule with INRIA's CDS. > Thus a node forwards a received flooded packet if: > > Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, > Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. > Rule 3: or it is an MPR of the first neighbor from which the > packet was received. > > Rule 3 can be dropped if the node cannot determine the previous hop. > so this combination of rules works in all cases. > I see only two possible drawbacks: > 1. A larger number of nodes transmit each packet (although much > less than the CDS consisting of all MPRs). > 2. If nodes cannot determine the previous hop, then the packet > may be flooded along paths that are not (nearly) min-hop. > > Again, this is just a quick thought, probably not the best solution. > > Regards, > Richard > > > > > Charles E. Perkins wrote: > >> Hello Richard, >> >> Richard Ogier wrote: >> >> >> >>> First, the CDS that Charlie has been suggesting, i.e., the >>> set of all MPR nodes, is found to include about 80% of the >>> nodes in the INRIA report. >>> >> >> >> On the other hand, the number of MPRs selected by a node is >> always far less than the number of neighbors for a node. >> >> >> >>> But the "guaranteed" MPR forwarding rule that requires a node >>> to relay any packet that is received from an MPR selector, >>> is also very inefficient (according to my own simulations), >>> and the MPR forwarding rule assumed in the INRIA report >>> is much more efficient - the packet is relayed only if the >>> *first* neighbor it was received from is an MPR selector. >>> >> >> >> O.K. I am convinced that I have to re-think this. It means >> that many MPRs are _not_ on the MPR tree rooted at the source >> of a packet, which I guess I should have realized before. >> It would be bad to make MPRs remember which source trees >> they are on (as opposed to just which neighbors they serve). >> >> >> >>> But this solution does not really address Charlie's concern >>> regarding reliability, and the desire to have a forwarding rule >>> that is independent of the previous hop. >>> >>> Now, the *efficient* CDS used in the INRIA report is defined as >>> follows. >>> A node decides that it is in the connected dominating set if: >>> Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, >>> Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. >>> >>> This is certainly an efficient way to make the forwarding rule >>> independent of the previous hop, but it does not provide >>> min-hop paths (using only CDS nodes as intermediate nodes) >>> and therefore is probably not very useful for route discovery >>> in AODV. Maybe I am wrong about this. >>> >> >> >> I reckon that the advantages of reduced congestion from >> flooding can, in many circumstances, outweigh the advantages >> of discoverying minimum-hop paths. Plus, it matters >> how far away from minimum the CDS paths are, on average. >> Do you happen to have statistics for that? >> >> Regards, >> Charlie P. >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 16:59:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11567 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:59:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTWw-0007rW-Ln for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:58:55 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QLws8J030221 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:58:54 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTWw-0007rM-8f for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:58:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11538 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:58:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTWu-00033J-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:58:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTVy-0002xQ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:57:55 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTVE-0002rp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:57:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTV8-0007Qb-3z; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTUw-0007Q2-Pn for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:56:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11489 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:56:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTUu-0002qV-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:56:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTU0-0002m1-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:55:53 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTTX-0002gc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:55:23 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1QLsZF14563; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:54:35 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402262154> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdzA8xYW; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:54:33 PST Message-ID: <403E6B0E.1A9683D0@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:54:22 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Young CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? References: <40369ED3.9020603@olsr.org> <20040226203512.GD17009@che.ojctech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello David, David Young wrote: > My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has been > that it is not effective for link sensing. Suppose we agree that link sensing is typically better done using Hello messages, and that Hello messages should only be used for links that do not offer any better mechanism. Would that sound about right to you? But then, doesn't it still mean that we ought to specify Hello messages for links that don't offer any better mechanism? And even if the determination can be made that the link is active, or broken, we still might unicast a Hello message to acquire the necessary layer-3 information. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 17:06:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12116 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:06:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTdq-0000Kp-1M for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:06:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QM61od001272 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:06:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTdp-0000KG-Ba for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:06:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12075 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:05:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTdn-0003vy-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:05:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTcn-0003o0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:04:57 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTbx-0003ha-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:04:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTbv-0008NG-7L; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:04:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTbk-0008Li-QI for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:03:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12000 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:03:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTbi-0003gx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:03:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTb3-0003cl-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:03:10 -0500 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca ([142.103.6.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTab-0003Vq-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:02:41 -0500 Received: from granville.cs.ubc.ca (granville.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.7.20]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.12.10/8.11.4) with ESMTP id i1QM2V0L015046; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:02:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:02:31 -0800 (PST) From: Kan Cai To: Richard Ogier cc: "Charles E. Perkins" , manet@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] (no subject) Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, all: > Now, the *efficient* CDS used in the INRIA report is defined as follows. > A node decides that it is in the connected dominating set if: > Rule 1: the node has a smaller ID than all its neighbors, > Rule 2: or it is an MPR of its neighbor with the smallest ID. > This is certainly an efficient way to make the forwarding rule > independent of the previous hop, but it does not provide > min-hop paths (using only CDS nodes as intermediate nodes) > and therefore is probably not very useful for route discovery > in AODV. Maybe I am wrong about this. > Also, the INRIA report considers two methods for selecting MPRs: > the greedy algorithm (as in OLSR), and the min ID algorithm. > The min ID algorithm allows nodes to select themselves > as MPRs (similar to TBRPF), and therefore has some advantages, > although it results in more transmissions (and a larger CDS). > In summary, maybe a combination of the methods discussed above > is a good solution, but I am still looking for a better solution. Forgive me if I am off topic. I read INRIA report, however I am just wondering why constructing a CDS has to deal with MPR. Using unit-disk graph can easily choose dominators according to some metrics such as node ID or node degree. And then we can connect these dominators together so that they can build up a CDS across the network. It has been theoretically proven that you can set up such a CDS with an linear approximation ratio to the optimal graph (see the message-optimal cds paper in mobihoc02). My simulation based on Glomosim shows pretty good result, although I mainly focus on unicast in the reduced backbone. However, as long as the backbone connectivity is good and can cover all the nodes in the network, broadcast should be good too, or is it? best regards, ken _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 17:23:34 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13093 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:23:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTuN-0001n8-Mj for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:23:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QMN7fV006885 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:23:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTuN-0001my-Hz for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:23:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13060 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:23:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTuL-000606-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:23:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTtT-0005r0-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:22:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTsZ-0005iM-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:21:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTsN-0001JQ-3d; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:21:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTs8-0001IT-9C for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:20:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12907 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:20:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTs5-0005du-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:20:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTr7-0005Xd-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:19:46 -0500 Received: from rainer.bnt.com ([12.4.218.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTq8-0005NW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:18:44 -0500 Received: from qwertyuiop2003 (h80ad37c6.dhcp.vt.edu [128.173.55.198]) by rainer.bnt.com (8.12.8p2/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1QMIY4t082705; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:18:34 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from taolin@vt.edu) Message-ID: <002701c3fcb6$76d2f4d0$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> Reply-To: "Tao Lin" From: "Tao Lin" To: "Kan Cai" , "Richard Ogier" Cc: "Charles E. Perkins" , References: Subject: Re: [manet] (no subject) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:18:28 -0500 Organization: Virginia Tech MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, I have the same feeling too. There are two ways to choose CDS nodes, either nodes chosen by neighbors (like MPR in OLSR) or chosen by themselves (such as many other CDS algorithms proposed in the literature). In other words, a CDS does not have to be associated with MPRs. Therefore, I would suggest, as Richard pointed out before, we should keep our options open and try to compare different approaches. Thanks, Tao Lin ECE Dept. Virginia Tech ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kan Cai" To: "Richard Ogier" Cc: "Charles E. Perkins" ; Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 5:02 PM Subject: [manet] (no subject) > > Hi, all: > > > Forgive me if I am off topic. I read INRIA report, however I am just > wondering why constructing a CDS has to deal with MPR. Using unit-disk > graph can easily choose dominators according to some metrics such as node > ID or node degree. And then we can connect these dominators together so > that they can build up a CDS across the network. It has been theoretically > proven that you can set up such a CDS with an linear approximation ratio > to the optimal graph (see the message-optimal cds paper in mobihoc02). > > My simulation based on Glomosim shows pretty good result, although I > mainly focus on unicast in the reduced backbone. However, as long as the > backbone connectivity is good and can cover all the nodes in the network, > broadcast should be good too, or is it? > > best regards, > ken > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 17:29:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13707 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:29:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwU0D-0002KL-UV for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:29:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QMT96f008937 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:29:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwU0D-0002K4-O0 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:29:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13663 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:29:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU0B-0006wq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:29:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTzH-0006mm-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:28:12 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTyG-0006dq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:27:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTyA-0001zY-7r; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:27:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwTxL-0001wn-2O for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:26:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13506 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:26:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTxI-0006VW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:26:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTwS-0006OM-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:25:17 -0500 Received: from 66-152-29-4.ded.btitelecom.net ([66.152.29.4] helo=mail.scires.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwTvn-0006Bb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:24:35 -0500 Received: from SRCATL-MTA by mail.scires.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:21:58 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.3 Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:21:46 -0500 From: "Pete Sholander" To: , Cc: Subject: Re: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David, Link-layer sensing via periodically-emitted Hello Packets is indeed = "suboptimal". However, based on my group's bi-monthly outdoor field = tests, it works well enough for radios that don't provide any useful = feedback on the per-link RF statistics and/or connectivity. Other folks = (NRL, et al) have reported similar results from their field tests. So ... --Pete Sholander Atlanta, GA >>> "Charles E. Perkins" 02/26/04 04:54PM >>> Hello David, David Young wrote: > My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has been > that it is not effective for link sensing. Suppose we agree that link sensing is typically better done using Hello messages, and that Hello messages should only be used for links that do not offer any better mechanism. Would that sound about right to you? But then, doesn't it still mean that we ought to specify Hello messages for links that don't offer any better mechanism? And even if the determination can be made that the link is active, or broken, we still might unicast a Hello message to acquire the necessary layer-3 information. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org=20 https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 17:37:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14064 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:37:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwU7n-0003O5-1V for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:36:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QMaxfI013015 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:36:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwU7m-0003Nq-Se for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:36:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14036 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:36:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU7k-00001y-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:36:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU6p-0007jI-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:36:00 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU65-0007d4-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:35:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwU5v-00031O-HM; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwU5l-00030e-W2 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:34:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13978 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:34:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU5j-0007b8-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:34:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU4p-0007WI-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:33:55 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwU49-0007Lr-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:33:13 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i1QMWhM06811 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:32:43 -0800 X-mProtect: <200402262232> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpd5a044g; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:32:41 PST Message-ID: <403E73FE.AD5ACB9@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:32:30 -0800 From: "Charles E. Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello folks, I made a really bad typo. I wrote: > Suppose we agree that link sensing is typically better done > using Hello messages I meant: Suppose we agree that link sensing is typically better done NOT using Hello messages ^^^ Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 18:00:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA15094 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:00:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwUU7-0005D4-VO for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:00:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1QN03JG020020 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:00:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwUU7-0005Cp-AI for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:00:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15054 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:59:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwUU4-0002V7-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:00:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwUT6-0002O5-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:59:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwUSK-0002Hu-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:58:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwUSA-0004sU-Oi; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:58:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwURD-0004lC-Oa for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:57:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14902 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:56:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwURA-0002AX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:57:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwUQN-00024b-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:56:11 -0500 Received: from note.orchestra.cse.unsw.edu.au ([129.94.242.24] ident=root) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwUPo-0001xm-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:55:36 -0500 Received: From 192.168.0.100 ([129.94.173.78] == sitcrc.cse.unsw.EDU.AU) (for ) (for ) (for ) (for ) By note With Smtp ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:55:31 +1100 From: Justin Lipman To: "Pete Sholander" , Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:55:30 +1100 Reply-To: justin@titr.uow.edu.au Organization: CRC-SIT Subject: Re: [manet] MPRF and "reliability" considerations User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: , References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402270955.30713.justin@titr.uow.edu.au> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Good point in general. Large amounts of user traffic can crowd out routing > protocol messages. > > However, can't this be solved in deployed MANETs via network-layer and > link-layer techniques that give routing-control traffic some level of > priority? Examples are DiffServ and IEEE 802.11p. (Note: in my old age, I > forget which letter was per-frame prioritization. So, "p" may be wrong!?) > Did you try those techniques in GloMoSim? Hi Pete, No I didnt. Ill take a look at what you are refering to as Im not aware of it. However, I dont think assigning priorities to packets will help given hidden node problems etc... However, I think the problem with using optimised flooding algorithms is that specific nodes are required to rebroadcast the message being flooded. Yet, if they do not receive the message, then the floods progression in a direction is limited. Secondly, by reducing the redundancy we limit the number of paths the message can successfully be delivered. kind regards, Justin -- Research Associate Smart Internet Technology Cooperative Research Centre http://www.titr.uow.edu.au/~justin > >>> Justin Lipman 02/25/04 10:11PM >>> > > Hi all, > > I wonder if there has been some consideration as to the performance of > optimised flooding mechanisms in the presence of background traffic. > > From my own simulations results in Glomosim... MPR and other optimised > flooding mechanisms performed very badly as increasing CBR background > traffic was introduced, especially compared to Blind flooding. This makes > their use very limited. > > The following is a paper on reliable optimised flooding that shows some > results for MPR, LMST, Blind flooding vs a more reliable version of LMST > that uses unicast packet transmission instead of broadcast packet > transmission. > > http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~justinl/rmst.pdf > > Kind regards, > Justin _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 19:05:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA17833 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:05:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVUx-0006Uj-1k for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:04:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R04wci024959 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:04:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVUw-0006UU-L8 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:04:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA17815 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:04:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVUt-0000N2-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:04:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVTy-0000HG-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:03:59 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVTA-0000C1-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:03:08 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AwVTB-0003DU-0V for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:03:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVT4-0006AE-3y; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:03:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVSC-00067Z-34 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:02:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA17744 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:02:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVS8-00005O-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:02:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVRB-0007mx-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:01:06 -0500 Received: from nestor.nmsu.edu ([128.123.34.146] helo=mail.nmsu.edu) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVQq-0007gX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:00:44 -0500 Received: from PCMullen2 (pc-mullen-2.NMSU.Edu [128.123.245.103]) by mail.nmsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD7D2088; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:00:39 -0700 (MST) From: "John Mullen" To: "'Charles E. Perkins'" , "'David Young'" Cc: Subject: RE: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:00:39 -0700 Message-ID: <002001c3fcc4$bc16b460$67f57b80@IEngr.ad.nmsu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <403E6B0E.1A9683D0@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Charles, One problem is that received power is a stochastic function of distance, etc., which means that successive packets can differ in signal strength by 20 or 30 db. In marginal areas, therefore, it is not possible to determine link quality on the basis of a single reception. Field tests seem to indicate that some mechanism is needed to deal with the stochastic nature of wireless links and Hello messages are one possibility, but not the only one. I would agree with your (corrected) statement, but also point out that link unreliability is an issue that will always bleed through to the MANET layer in some way. Hi David, Your interpretation may be right, but I suggest you look at a log of RREQ and RREP packets. A great deal of capacity is lost due to occasional successes over unreliable links, causing unreliable routes to be chosen, which then fail. That is, there may be another cause for the symptoms you describe. John Mullen -----Original Message----- From: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Charles E. Perkins Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 2:54 PM To: David Young Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? Hello David, David Young wrote: > My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has > been that it is not effective for link sensing. Suppose we agree that link sensing is typically better done using Hello messages, and that Hello messages should only be used for links that do not offer any better mechanism. Would that sound about right to you? But then, doesn't it still mean that we ought to specify Hello messages for links that don't offer any better mechanism? And even if the determination can be made that the link is active, or broken, we still might unicast a Hello message to acquire the necessary layer-3 information. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 19:10:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA17995 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:10:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVZs-0007Cu-4J for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:10:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R0A4SX027696 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:10:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVZr-0007Cb-Uf for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:10:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA17968 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:09:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVZo-0000rP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:10:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVYm-0000l3-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:08:56 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVYC-0000gC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:08:20 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AwVYC-0003GI-2W for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:08:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVXv-0006s3-4I; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:08:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwVXm-0006pz-AZ for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:07:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA17947 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:07:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVXi-0000f5-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:07:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVWj-0000aK-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:06:50 -0500 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.49]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwVVm-0000QG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:05:50 -0500 Received: from sdn-ap-023castocp0213.dialsprint.net ([65.178.104.213] helo=earthlink.net) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AwVVi-0000IX-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:05:46 -0800 Message-ID: <403E8A03.6040709@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:06:27 -0800 From: Richard Ogier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] (no subject) CDS vs. MPRs References: <002701c3fcb6$76d2f4d0$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> In-Reply-To: <002701c3fcb6$76d2f4d0$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, I agree that you do not need MPRs to compute a CDS. The advantage of MPRs is that they are an efficient way to flood along min-hop paths from the originator. A CDS does not flood along min-hop paths from every possible originator, unless it is a very large CDS. Some protocols (like OLSR) work better with MPRs. But MPRs are not the best choice in all cases. So is there a single solution that works well for all applications? Or maybe we should use MPRs for some applications and only a CDS (not based on MPRs) for other applications. As Tao says, we should keep our options open and compare different approaches. While I'm here, I want to mention another benefit of using min ID instead of the greedy algorithm (as in OLSR) for computing MPRs. The greedy algorithm results in fewer MPRs, but these MPRs are close to the boundary of the reception range, and are therefore more likely to be unstable due to mobility. Using min ID results in more MPRs, but they are more likely to be stable. Stability of MPRs is important for a number of reasons that I won't go into now (but clearly it is more likely for flooded packets to be lost if MPRs are changing during flooding). Regards, Richard Tao Lin wrote: >Hi all, > >I have the same feeling too. There are two ways to choose CDS nodes, either >nodes chosen by neighbors (like MPR in OLSR) or chosen by themselves (such >as many other CDS algorithms proposed in the literature). In other words, a >CDS does not have to be associated with MPRs. Therefore, I would suggest, >as Richard pointed out before, we should keep our options open and try to >compare different approaches. > >Thanks, > Tao Lin > ECE Dept. > Virginia Tech > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kan Cai" >To: "Richard Ogier" >Cc: "Charles E. Perkins" ; >Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 5:02 PM >Subject: [manet] (no subject) > > > > >>Hi, all: >> >> >>Forgive me if I am off topic. I read INRIA report, however I am just >>wondering why constructing a CDS has to deal with MPR. Using unit-disk >>graph can easily choose dominators according to some metrics such as node >>ID or node degree. And then we can connect these dominators together so >>that they can build up a CDS across the network. It has been theoretically >>proven that you can set up such a CDS with an linear approximation ratio >>to the optimal graph (see the message-optimal cds paper in mobihoc02). >> >>My simulation based on Glomosim shows pretty good result, although I >>mainly focus on unicast in the reduced backbone. However, as long as the >>backbone connectivity is good and can cover all the nodes in the network, >>broadcast should be good too, or is it? >> >>best regards, >>ken >> >>_______________________________________________ >>manet mailing list >>manet@ietf.org >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >> >> > > >_______________________________________________ >manet mailing list >manet@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 19:49:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19307 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:49:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwWBa-0001Ht-UQ for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:49:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R0n23r004943 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:49:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwWBa-0001He-Lk for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:49:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19283 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:49:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwWBY-0004PC-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:49:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwWAd-0004IP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:48:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwW9m-0004CD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:47:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwW9d-0000xC-Oe; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:47:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwW9c-0000wu-5V for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:47:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19220 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:46:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwW9a-0004BO-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:46:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwW8j-00046P-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:46:05 -0500 Received: from rainer.bnt.com ([12.4.218.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwW88-00040a-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:45:28 -0500 Received: from tom ([198.70.230.133]) by rainer.bnt.com (8.12.8p2/8.12.8) with SMTP id i1R0jN4t009560 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:45:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from taolin@vt.edu) Message-ID: <006601c3fccb$6f7e1380$2502a8c0@triplecom.net> From: "Tao Lin" To: References: <002701c3fcb6$76d2f4d0$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> <403E8A03.6040709@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [manet] (no subject) CDS vs. MPRs Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:48:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Besides Richard's comments, another issue I would like to point out is that using MPRs as CDS nodes may result in increasing loads for MPRs nodes. Since in OLSR, MPRs nodes have special roles in forwarding control messages AND forwarding user messages. It is highly possible that these nodes will have more transmission and receiving events that other nodes, which may result in higher possibility of packet collisions and more power consumptions in these nodes, especially when the network load is heavy. On the contrary, a CDS that does not depend on those nodes that are chosen to forward user application packets might avoid this potential heavier load problem. I think this topic might be of interest. Thanks, Tao Lin ECE Dept. Virginia Tech ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Ogier" To: Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 7:06 PM Subject: Re: [manet] (no subject) CDS vs. MPRs > Yes, I agree that you do not need MPRs to compute a CDS. > The advantage of MPRs is that they are an efficient way to > flood along min-hop paths from the originator. > A CDS does not flood along min-hop paths from every possible > originator, unless it is a very large CDS. > Some protocols (like OLSR) work better with MPRs. > But MPRs are not the best choice in all cases. So is there > a single solution that works well for all applications? > Or maybe we should use MPRs for some applications and > only a CDS (not based on MPRs) for other applications. > As Tao says, we should keep our options open and compare > different approaches. > > While I'm here, I want to mention another benefit of using > min ID instead of the greedy algorithm (as in OLSR) > for computing MPRs. The greedy algorithm results in fewer > MPRs, but these MPRs are close to the boundary of the > reception range, and are therefore more likely to be > unstable due to mobility. Using min ID results in more MPRs, > but they are more likely to be stable. Stability of MPRs is > important for a number of reasons that I won't go into now > (but clearly it is more likely for flooded packets to be > lost if MPRs are changing during flooding). > > Regards, > Richard > > > Tao Lin wrote: > > >Hi all, > > > >I have the same feeling too. There are two ways to choose CDS nodes, either > >nodes chosen by neighbors (like MPR in OLSR) or chosen by themselves (such > >as many other CDS algorithms proposed in the literature). In other words, a > >CDS does not have to be associated with MPRs. Therefore, I would suggest, > >as Richard pointed out before, we should keep our options open and try to > >compare different approaches. > > > >Thanks, > > Tao Lin > > ECE Dept. > > Virginia Tech > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kan Cai" > >To: "Richard Ogier" > >Cc: "Charles E. Perkins" ; > >Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 5:02 PM > >Subject: [manet] (no subject) > > > > > > > > > >>Hi, all: > >> > >> > >>Forgive me if I am off topic. I read INRIA report, however I am just > >>wondering why constructing a CDS has to deal with MPR. Using unit-disk > >>graph can easily choose dominators according to some metrics such as node > >>ID or node degree. And then we can connect these dominators together so > >>that they can build up a CDS across the network. It has been theoretically > >>proven that you can set up such a CDS with an linear approximation ratio > >>to the optimal graph (see the message-optimal cds paper in mobihoc02). > >> > >>My simulation based on Glomosim shows pretty good result, although I > >>mainly focus on unicast in the reduced backbone. However, as long as the > >>backbone connectivity is good and can cover all the nodes in the network, > >>broadcast should be good too, or is it? > >> > >>best regards, > >>ken > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>manet mailing list > >>manet@ietf.org > >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > >> > >> > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >manet mailing list > >manet@ietf.org > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 20:58:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA22231 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:58:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXGO-0005gY-BR for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:58:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R1w4ix021848 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:58:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXGO-0005gJ-21 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:58:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA22215 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:58:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXGL-0003eL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:58:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXFR-0003XP-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:57:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXEd-0003RR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:56:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXES-0005LF-Pb; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:56:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXEJ-0005Ke-1B for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:55:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA22163 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:55:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXEG-0003OZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:55:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXDI-0003J6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:54:52 -0500 Received: from note.orchestra.cse.unsw.edu.au ([129.94.242.24] ident=root) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXCN-00038d-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:53:55 -0500 Received: From 192.168.0.100 ([129.94.173.78] == sitcrc.cse.unsw.EDU.AU) (for ) (for ) By note With Smtp ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:53:44 +1100 From: Justin Lipman To: Richard Ogier , manet@ietf.org Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:53:44 +1100 Reply-To: justin@titr.uow.edu.au Organization: CRC-SIT Subject: Re: [manet] CDS vs. MPR vs. UBF User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <002701c3fcb6$76d2f4d0$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> <403E8A03.6040709@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <403E8A03.6040709@earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402271253.44312.justin@titr.uow.edu.au> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Richard, > While I'm here, I want to mention another benefit of using > min ID instead of the greedy algorithm (as in OLSR) > for computing MPRs. The greedy algorithm results in fewer > MPRs, but these MPRs are close to the boundary of the > reception range, and are therefore more likely to be > unstable due to mobility. Using min ID results in more MPRs, > but they are more likely to be stable. Stability of MPRs is > important for a number of reasons that I won't go into now > (but clearly it is more likely for flooded packets to be > lost if MPRs are changing during flooding). Really very good point. Sorry, I dont mean to push my own work, but Utility Based flooding (UBF) allows this to be achieved quite easily as well as including where necessary any other factors such as a node's internal battery power etc. Kind regards, Justin -- Research Associate Smart Internet Technology Cooperative Research Centre http://www.titr.uow.edu.au/~justin _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 21:29:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24026 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXkS-0007SV-B4 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R2T8hp028665 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXkS-0007SG-1O for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24006 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXkP-0007WO-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:29:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXjW-0007Oy-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:28:11 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXiU-0007Fe-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:27:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXiP-00077G-Co; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:27:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwXhd-00074q-58 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:26:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA23747 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:26:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXha-00075L-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:26:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXgS-0006qv-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:25:01 -0500 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca ([142.103.6.50]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwXfI-0006YP-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:23:49 -0500 Received: from granville.cs.ubc.ca (granville.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.7.20]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.12.10/8.11.4) with ESMTP id i1R2Nf0L027590; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:23:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:23:41 -0800 (PST) From: Kan Cai To: Richard Ogier cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] (no subject) CDS vs. MPRs In-Reply-To: <403E8A03.6040709@earthlink.net> Message-ID: References: <002701c3fcb6$76d2f4d0$c637ad80@qwertyuiop2003> <403E8A03.6040709@earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > The advantage of MPRs is that they are an efficient way to > flood along min-hop paths from the originator. > A CDS does not flood along min-hop paths from every possible > originator, unless it is a very large CDS. I agree that MPR is flooding along min-hop paths from the originator. But I am not sure how much this advantage it can get compared to CDS. The only extra transmission CDS requires is to ask the src node to forward the message to its dominator, thats it. Then the dominator handles broadcasts in the network. So if I am right, the real advantage of MPR on this aspect is just one less transmission. Another issue here is in CDS, only dominators need to rebroadcast if necessary, while MPR perhaps requires all MPR nodes need to do this. Certainly, in MPR CDS, you can ask the nodes selected by rule 1) to do the broadcast. Correct me if I am wrong, thanks. regards, ken _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Feb 26 22:28:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25922 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:28:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwYfS-0002rD-0s for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:28:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R3S1X7010977 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwYfR-0002qy-OK for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:28:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25888 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:27:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwYfO-0005NJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:27:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwYeV-0005HN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:27:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwYde-0005CS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:26:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwYdW-0002Vq-Sh; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:26:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwYdT-0002VN-8X for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:25:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25843 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:25:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwYdQ-0005Al-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:25:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwYcT-00054X-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:24:58 -0500 Received: from web40005.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.78.23]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwYbU-0004uA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:23:56 -0500 Message-ID: <20040227032326.5467.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [129.110.39.12] by web40005.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:23:26 PST Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:23:26 -0800 (PST) From: ruchir sinha To: manet@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040226203512.GD17009@che.ojctech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-790899938-1077852206=:5273" Subject: [manet] Dsr Behaviour Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --0-790899938-1077852206=:5273 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, Can anyone suggest the reason as to why DSR chooses a longer route sometimes in prefernece to existing shorter route....even if there is no break in nay of the links involved...i obseved this tendency of the DSR protocol while following the path followed by the protocol for a particular source destination pair..... While one may understand the logic in switching to shorter path even without breaks i clearly don't see the justification in going for a longer path....something DSR does...in absence fo any link breaks....can anyone explain Regards Ruchir David Young wrote: The discussion of OLSR link hysteresis & OLSR hello protocol reminds me of my misgivings about using hello protocols for link-sensing. My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has been that it is not effective for link sensing. The multicast Hello packets get "clobbered" (to use the technical term) by the unicast packets. Routes are quite stable until the network sees prolonged unicast traffic. For example, during an FTP download, hellos do not get through, and OSPF detects that links are down in spite of their ability to bear traffic. My network is static, so I "solved" the problem by raising the OSPF Dead Interval. That is no solution for a mobile network. Note that in my example, the FTP stream will produce ample evidence of the link's bearing ability, if only OSPF will "eavesdrop" on it. It will depend on the link layer whether or not hello messages help fulfill the link-sensing role, so I question whether it is appropriate for a layer-3 routing protocol to define link-sensing as a role for the hello protocol. It seems that a layer-3 routing protocol should define an abstract link-sensing module, only. A link-sensing module will provide link indications (up/down, percentage BER/PER, S/N, "goodness") to a routing module (OLSR, AODV, whatever). A routing module can assist the link-sensing module by registering as a beacon-producing/expecting agent. In Java-like pseudocode, the abstract interface might look like this abstract class link_sense_listener { link_sense(neighbor, link_quality); } abstract class link_sense_module { registration register_listener(link_sense_listener listener); unregister_listener(registration r); registration register_beacon(integer interval, integer jitter, integer pkt_length, boolean does_produce, boolean does_expect); unregister_beacon(registration r); } class router extends link_sense_listener { registration link_listen_registration, beacon_registration; link_sense(neighbor n, link_quality q) { /* update link database here */ } router constructor(ip_address my_ip, integer hello_rate, link_sense_module lm) { self.link_listen_registration = lm.register_listener(self); self.beacon_registration = lm.register_beacon(hello_rate, .1 * hello_rate, 128, true, true); } } Thoughts? Dave -- David Young OJC Technologies dyoung@ojctech.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail --0-790899938-1077852206=:5273 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Hi,
     Can anyone suggest the reason as to why DSR chooses a longer route sometimes in prefernece to existing shorter route....even if there is no break in nay of the links involved...i obseved this tendency of the DSR protocol while following the path followed by the protocol for a particular source destination pair.....
 
While one may understand the logic in switching to shorter path even without breaks i clearly don't see the justification in going for a longer path....something DSR does...in absence fo any link breaks....can anyone explain
 
Regards
Ruchir

David Young <dyoung@pobox.com> wrote:
The discussion of OLSR link hysteresis & OLSR hello protocol reminds me
of my misgivings about using hello protocols for link-sensing.

My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has been
that it is not effective for link sensing. The multicast Hello packets
get "clobbered" (to use the technical term) by the unicast packets.
Routes are quite stable until the network sees prolonged unicast
traffic. For example, during an FTP download, hellos do not get through,
and OSPF detects that links are down in spite of their ability to bear
traffic. My network is static, so I "solved" the problem by raising the
OSPF Dead Interval. That is no solution for a mobile network.

Note that in my example, the FTP stream will produce ample evidence of
the link's bearing ability, if only OSPF will "eavesdrop" on it.

It will dep! end on the link layer whether or not hello messages help
fulfill the link-sensing role, so I question whether it is appropriate
for a layer-3 routing protocol to define link-sensing as a role for
the hello protocol. It seems that a layer-3 routing protocol should
define an abstract link-sensing module, only. A link-sensing module will
provide link indications (up/down, percentage BER/PER, S/N, "goodness")
to a routing module (OLSR, AODV, whatever). A routing module can assist
the link-sensing module by registering as a beacon-producing/expecting
agent. In Java-like pseudocode, the abstract interface might look
like this

abstract class link_sense_listener {
link_sense(neighbor, link_quality);
}

abstract class link_sense_module {
registration register_listener(link_sense_listener listener);
unregister_listener(registration r);
registration register_beacon(integer interval, integer jitter,
integer pkt_length, boolean does_produce,
boolean does_expect);
unregister_beacon(registration r);
}

class router extends link_sense_listener {

registration link_listen_registration, beacon_registration;

link_sense(neighbor n, link_quality q) {
/* update link database here */
}

router constructor(ip_address my_ip, integer hello_rate,
link_sense_module lm)
{
self.link_listen_registration =
lm.register_listener(self);
self.beacon_registration =
lm.register_beacon(hello_rate, .1 * hello_rate,
128, true, true);
}
}

Thoughts?

Dave

--
David Young OJC Technologies
dyoung@ojctech.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
manet@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

Do you Yahoo!?
Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail --0-790899938-1077852206=:5273-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 27 02:22:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA17396 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:22:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwcJA-00071i-F6 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:21:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1R7LGsf026919 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:21:16 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwcJ2-0006uJ-Qa for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:21:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA17324 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:21:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwcIz-0005Ht-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:21:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwcI5-0005BJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:20:10 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwcH9-00054S-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:19:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwcH1-00060r-79; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:19:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwcGP-0005pk-K7 for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:18:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA17092 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:18:22 -0500 (EST) From: jzeeff@internet2.edu Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwcGM-0004yc-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:18:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwcFS-0004sJ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:17:27 -0500 Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwcEl-0004l9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:16:43 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EC452D8D; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:16:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (basie.internet2.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07830-08; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:16:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix, from userid 48) id C51912D8E; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:16:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from 152.160.29.6 ( [152.160.29.6]) as user jzeeff@localhost by mail.internet2.edu with HTTP; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:16:43 -0500 Message-ID: <1077866203.403eeedba365b@mail.internet2.edu> Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:16:43 -0500 To: ruchir sinha Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Dsr Behaviour References: <20040227032326.5467.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040227032326.5467.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.1 X-Originating-IP: 152.160.29.6 X-Virus-Scanned: by mail.internet2.edu virus scanner Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Why would you want a routing protocol to pick the shortest path (vs the best path)? > > Hi, > Can anyone suggest the reason as to why DSR chooses a longer route > sometimes in prefernece to existing shorter route....even if there is no > break in nay of the links involved...i obseved this tendency of the DSR > protocol while following the path followed by the protocol for a particular > source destination pair..... > > While one may understand the logic in switching to shorter path even without > breaks i clearly don't see the justification in going for a longer > path....something DSR does...in absence fo any link breaks....can anyone > explain > > Regards > Ruchir > > David Young wrote: > The discussion of OLSR link hysteresis & OLSR hello protocol reminds me > of my misgivings about using hello protocols for link-sensing. > > My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has been > that it is not effective for link sensing. The multicast Hello packets > get "clobbered" (to use the technical term) by the unicast packets. > Routes are quite stable until the network sees prolonged unicast > traffic. For example, during an FTP download, hellos do not get through, > and OSPF detects that links are down in spite of their ability to bear > traffic. My network is static, so I "solved" the problem by raising the > OSPF Dead Interval. That is no solution for a mobile network. > > Note that in my example, the FTP stream will produce ample evidence of > the link's bearing ability, if only OSPF will "eavesdrop" on it. > > It will depend on the link layer whether or not hello messages help > fulfill the link-sensing role, so I question whether it is appropriate > for a layer-3 routing protocol to define link-sensing as a role for > the hello protocol. It seems that a layer-3 routing protocol should > define an abstract link-sensing module, only. A link-sensing module will > provide link indications (up/down, percentage BER/PER, S/N, "goodness") > to a routing module (OLSR, AODV, whatever). A routing module can assist > the link-sensing module by registering as a beacon-producing/expecting > agent. In Java-like pseudocode, the abstract interface might look > like this > > abstract class link_sense_listener { > link_sense(neighbor, link_quality); > } > > abstract class link_sense_module { > registration register_listener(link_sense_listener listener); > unregister_listener(registration r); > registration register_beacon(integer interval, integer jitter, > integer pkt_length, boolean does_produce, > boolean does_expect); > unregister_beacon(registration r); > } > > class router extends link_sense_listener { > > registration link_listen_registration, beacon_registration; > > link_sense(neighbor n, link_quality q) { > /* update link database here */ > } > > router constructor(ip_address my_ip, integer hello_rate, > link_sense_module lm) > { > self.link_listen_registration = > lm.register_listener(self); > self.beacon_registration = > lm.register_beacon(hello_rate, .1 * hello_rate, > 128, true, true); > } > } > > Thoughts? > > Dave > > -- > David Young OJC Technologies > dyoung@ojctech.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 27 07:59:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA28979 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:59:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwhaL-0008GF-A1 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:59:21 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1RCxLMY031749 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:59:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwhaL-0008G0-0V for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:59:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA28934 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:59:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwhaJ-0000kR-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:59:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwhZP-0000dv-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:58:24 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwhYV-0000YD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:57:27 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwhY6-0007zV-Dq; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwhXP-0007yY-Um for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:56:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA28881 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:56:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwhXP-0000RB-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:56:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwhWY-0000Mk-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:55:27 -0500 Received: from bay12-f116.bay12.hotmail.com ([64.4.35.116] helo=hotmail.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwhWJ-0000HA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:55:11 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 04:33:33 -0800 Received: from 203.129.220.115 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:33:33 GMT X-Originating-IP: [203.129.220.115] X-Originating-Email: [karun8880@hotmail.com] X-Sender: karun8880@hotmail.com From: "Karun Verma" To: manet@ietf.org Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:03:33 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Feb 2004 12:33:33.0452 (UTC) FILETIME=[E9CF04C0:01C3FD2D] Subject: [manet] Routing Overhead Calculation?? Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello All, Sorry for the last mail. I found my mistake in the script i written and got the wrong results. Can anybody now tell me how can find routnig Overhead from traces of protocols in MANET. something about the use of sequence numbers was mentioned in the paper of DSDV, that i could not interpret. Please help me in calculating the results. Thanx in advance ############################################ # Karun Verma # ########################################### _________________________________________________________________ Contact brides & grooms FREE! http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmltag Only on www.shaadi.com. Register now! _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 27 12:17:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14719 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:17:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwlbR-0006yi-Nh for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:16:45 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1RHGjsj026820 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:16:45 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwlbR-0006yV-GJ for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:16:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14711 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:16:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwlbQ-0002Yp-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:16:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Awlai-0002SN-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:16:01 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awla1-0002Kl-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:15:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwlZn-0006e0-0w; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:15:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AwlZc-0006dL-RK for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:14:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14635 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:14:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwlZb-0002KD-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:14:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AwlYZ-0002CG-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:13:48 -0500 Received: from bareed3.maktoob.net ([195.172.126.104] helo=maktoobchat.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwlXp-00024W-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:13:01 -0500 Received: from [195.172.126.106] (HELO maktoobchat.net) by maktoobchat.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP id 11924567 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:15:56 +0000 Received: from [195.172.126.104] (HELO maktoob.com) by maktoobchat.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP id 12921859 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:00:22 +0000 From: "yazeed al-sbou" To: manet@ietf.org Comment: Maktoob By BOC X-Mailer: Maktoob 2.0 [Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)] X-Originating-IP: [143.52.2.80] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1256 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:00:22 +0000 Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [manet] ASKIN ABOUT RSVP PROTOCOL Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all.... Iam trying to do some simulation using RSVP protocol.I want to ask where can I find its implementation in the NS. thanks in advance... YOURS Yazeed Ahamd Al-Sbou, Research Student School of Engineering Sheaf Building - Room 4311, Sheffield Hallam University,City Campus Sheiffield, S1 1WB Tel(university):+441142253254 Mobile 00447813402741 Yazeed.A.Al-Sbou@student.shu.ac.uk _________________________________________________ Meet new friends based on YOUR criteria! Search for friends based on hobbies, interest, or even location! Go to Maktoob Friends NOW. http://www.maktoob.com/ _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 27 12:49:03 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15874 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:49:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awm6G-0000pF-CV for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:48:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1RHmaPq003167 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:48:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awm6F-0000p0-NO for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:48:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15860 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:48:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awm6D-0006KL-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:48:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Awm5L-0006Du-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:47:39 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awm4n-00067d-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:47:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awm4j-0000Vc-4R; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:47:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awm4C-0000UB-2f for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:46:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15770 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:46:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awm4A-00064q-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:46:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Awm3B-0005yW-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:45:25 -0500 Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk ([128.16.5.31]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awm2D-0005rt-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:44:25 -0500 Received: from qos-gw-1.cs.ucl.ac.uk by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with local SMTP id ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:43:57 +0000 Message-ID: <403F806E.4000309@cs.ucl.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:37:50 +0000 From: Yangcheng HUANG Reply-To: y.huang@cs.ucl.ac.uk Organization: UCL User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yazeed al-sbou CC: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] ASKIN ABOUT RSVP PROTOCOL References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.ncc.up.pt/~rprior/ns/index-en.html yazeed al-sbou wrote: > Hi all.... > Iam trying to do some simulation using RSVP protocol.I want to ask where can I > find its implementation in the NS. > > thanks in advance... > YOURS > > > Yazeed Ahamd Al-Sbou, Research Student > School of Engineering > Sheaf Building - Room 4311, > Sheffield Hallam University,City Campus > Sheiffield, S1 1WB > Tel(university):+441142253254 > Mobile 00447813402741 > Yazeed.A.Al-Sbou@student.shu.ac.uk > _________________________________________________ > Meet new friends based on YOUR criteria! Search for friends based on hobbies, interest, or even location! Go to Maktoob Friends NOW. > http://www.maktoob.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 27 23:06:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15372 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:06:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awvjt-0005Dq-Fr for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:06:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1S469XY020049 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:06:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awvjs-0005DB-6u for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:06:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15359 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:06:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awvjm-0000fn-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:06:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Awviz-0000Z6-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:05:14 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwviA-0000Sc-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:04:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awvhr-0004vT-LR; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:04:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Awvhl-0004uG-El for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:03:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15296 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:03:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Awvhh-0000Rp-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:03:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Awvgl-0000M9-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:02:56 -0500 Received: from che.ojctech.com ([209.254.133.74]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AwvgD-0000Dn-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:02:21 -0500 Received: from che.ojctech.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by che.ojctech.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1S41qRG008676; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:01:52 -0600 Received: (from dyoung@localhost) by che.ojctech.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1S41oLW008674; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:01:50 -0600 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:01:50 -0600 From: David Young To: "Charles E. Perkins" Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? Message-ID: <20040228040150.GK17009@che.ojctech.com> Mail-Followup-To: "Charles E. Perkins" , manet@ietf.org References: <40369ED3.9020603@olsr.org> <20040226203512.GD17009@che.ojctech.com> <403E6B0E.1A9683D0@iprg.nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <403E6B0E.1A9683D0@iprg.nokia.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 01:54:22PM -0800, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > Hello David, > > David Young wrote: > > > My experience with the OSPF Hello protocol on 802.11b networks has been > > that it is not effective for link sensing. > > Suppose we agree that link sensing is typically better done > using Hello messages, and that Hello messages should only > be used for links that do not offer any better mechanism. > > Would that sound about right to you? > > But then, doesn't it still mean that we ought to specify > Hello messages for links that don't offer any better mechanism? > And even if the determination can be made that the link is > active, or broken, we still might unicast a Hello message > to acquire the necessary layer-3 information. I think we are essentially agreed. I do not want to get rid of Hellos altogether. I do think that it would be a good idea to relieve the protocol and the link of the periodic hello-message burden, when both a better link-sensing alternative exists, and periodic hello messages serve no other purpose. I see what you mean about unicasting Hellos. Dave -- David Young OJC Technologies dyoung@ojctech.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Feb 27 23:27:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16209 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:27:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aww40-0006e3-NU for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:26:56 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1S4QuQD025536 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:26:56 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aww3y-0006dl-JP for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:26:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16198 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:26:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aww3w-00033H-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:26:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aww2z-0002xS-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:25:54 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aww2a-0002ro-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:25:28 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aww2B-0006Lo-00; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:25:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aww21-0006LH-MM for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:24:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16162 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:24:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aww1z-0002r6-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:24:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aww19-0002m1-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:23:59 -0500 Received: from che.ojctech.com ([209.254.133.74]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aww0q-0002fp-00 for manet@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:23:40 -0500 Received: from che.ojctech.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by che.ojctech.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1S4NBRG010077; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:23:11 -0600 Received: (from dyoung@localhost) by che.ojctech.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1S4NAcI010075; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:23:10 -0600 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:23:10 -0600 From: David Young To: John Mullen Cc: "'Charles E. Perkins'" , manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] hello protocols inappropriate for link sensing? Message-ID: <20040228042310.GL17009@che.ojctech.com> Mail-Followup-To: John Mullen , "'Charles E. Perkins'" , manet@ietf.org References: <403E6B0E.1A9683D0@iprg.nokia.com> <002001c3fcc4$bc16b460$67f57b80@IEngr.ad.nmsu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <002001c3fcc4$bc16b460$67f57b80@IEngr.ad.nmsu.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 05:00:39PM -0700, John Mullen wrote: > Hi David, > > Your interpretation may be right, but I suggest you look at a log of > RREQ and RREP packets. A great deal of capacity is lost due to > occasional successes over unreliable links, causing unreliable routes to > be chosen, which then fail. That is, there may be another cause for the > symptoms you describe. It is an OSPF network, but I know what you mean in the abstract about RREQ/RREP succeeding over unreliable links. The network in question has no alternative routes, so I don't think that's the problem. I am surprised if the RREQ/RREP packets' successes on marginal links are only occasional. I am interested to hear more about that. I have pessimistically assumed that RREQ/RREP discovery frequently yields paths that carry small RREQ/RREP packets fine, but which perform badly with longish TCP segments. Dave -- David Young OJC Technologies dyoung@ojctech.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 28 05:23:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10459 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:23:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax1cg-0005JT-3i for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:23:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1SAN6R4020422 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:23:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax1cf-0005JJ-T1 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:23:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10447 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:23:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax1cc-0001BD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:23:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax1bg-000151-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:22:05 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax1ar-0000zF-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:21:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax1ag-00051B-8t; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:21:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax1Zk-0004vn-9y for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:20:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10367 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:20:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax1Zh-0000s0-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:20:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax1Ym-0000me-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:19:05 -0500 Received: from imap.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax1Xx-0000bZ-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:18:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 17038 invoked by uid 65534); 28 Feb 2004 10:17:41 -0000 Received: from pD9E01C6B.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO NicoLaptop) (217.224.28.107) by mail.gmx.net (mp016) with SMTP; 28 Feb 2004 11:17:41 +0100 X-Authenticated: #15262315 From: "Nico Bayer" To: "IETF-MANET" Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:15:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002E_01C3FDEC.2BA775D0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Thread-Index: AcP948fkbeYnkx4YTrexLbk1ADZh9g== Message-Id: Subject: [manet] IPv6 MANET Address Prefix Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN, HTML_MESSAGE,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C3FDEC.2BA775D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello list, can someone point me to the draft or rfc where the manet address prefix fec0:0:0:ffff::/64 was defined? Thanks in advance. Regards, Nico ----- Nico Bayer ------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C3FDEC.2BA775D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello list,

 

can someone point me = to the draft or rfc where the manet address prefix fec0:0:0:ffff::/64 was = defined?

Thanks in = advance.

 

Regards, = Nico

 

 = ;

 = ;

-----

Nico Bayer

 

------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C3FDEC.2BA775D0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 28 07:40:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15111 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax3lJ-0001LG-PN for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1SCe9G8005147 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax3lF-0001Ks-Hw for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15087 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax3lE-0000hD-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax3kH-0000YT-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:39:06 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax3jR-0000SJ-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:38:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax3jG-0000zW-5l; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:38:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ax3iS-0000jW-3m for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:37:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15043 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:37:10 -0500 (EST) From: Paal.Engelstad@telenor.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax3iR-0000Jt-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:37:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax3hP-0000E2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:36:08 -0500 Received: from virus-out.ttyl.com ([193.212.240.200] helo=virus-out-st.online.no) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ax3gX-00002q-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:35:13 -0500 Received: from tns-fbu-22-209.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.162.190] [134.47.162.190]) by scan.telenor.net with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:34:41 +0100 Received: from tns-fbu-22-213.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.162.191]) by tns-fbu-22-209.corp.telenor.no with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:34:37 +0100 Received: from tns-fbu-2e-004.corp.telenor.no ([134.47.163.65]) by tns-fbu-22-213.corp.telenor.no with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:34:37 +0100 content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Subject: SV: [manet] IPv6 MANET Address Prefix Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:34:36 +0100 Message-Id: <375BFFDA619DBC4AA93996BF1F1D239657B8A9@TNS-FBU-2E-004.corp.telenor.no> Thread-Topic: [manet] IPv6 MANET Address Prefix Thread-Index: AcP948fkbeYnkx4YTrexLbk1ADZh9gAEXMlw To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Feb 2004 12:34:37.0551 (UTC) FILETIME=[3A6D7FF0:01C3FDF7] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C3FDF7.39F84FF0" Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_70_80, HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3FDF7.39F84FF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Nico, =20 I do not know of any RFCs that assigns the address prefix you refer to. = I know, however, that the prefix that you refer to was proposed in the = old address-autoconfiguration draft = in 2000/2001. =20 The draft has expired (which I think is unfortunate, because I think it = would be a straightforward and minimal starting point to develop a good = solution address autoconfiguration for MANETs). However, you may for = example locate the draft on the following link that I retrieved by = google: =20 http://genie.iitd.ernet.in/~bnj/CS858-Fall-2003-04-GENIE/PapersandRFCs-Ad= hocNetworks/draft-perkins-manet-autoconf-01.txt =20 Enjoy! =20 Paal -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: manet-admin@ietf.org [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]P=E5 vegne av = Nico Bayer Sendt: 28. februar 2004 11:15 Til: IETF-MANET Emne: [manet] IPv6 MANET Address Prefix Hello list, =20 can someone point me to the draft or rfc where the manet address prefix = fec0:0:0:ffff::/64 was defined? Thanks in advance. =20 Regards, Nico =20 =20 =20 ----- Nico Bayer =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3FDF7.39F84FF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi=20 Nico,
 
I do not know of any RFCs that assigns the address prefix you = refer to. I=20 know, however, that the prefix that you refer to was proposed in the old = address-autoconfiguration draft <draft-perkins-manet-autoconf-01.txt> in=20 2000/2001.
 
The = draft has=20 expired (which I think is unfortunate, because I think it would be a=20 straightforward and minimal starting point to develop a good solution = address=20 autoconfiguration for MANETs). However, you may for example locate the = draft on=20 the following link that I retrieved by google:
 
http://genie.iit= d.ernet.in/~bnj/CS858-Fall-2003-04-GENIE/PapersandRFCs-AdhocNetworks/draf= t-perkins-manet-autoconf-01.txt
 
Enjoy!
 
Paal
-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: = manet-admin@ietf.org=20 [mailto:manet-admin@ietf.org]P=E5 vegne av Nico = Bayer
Sendt:=20 28. februar 2004 11:15
Til: IETF-MANET
Emne: = [manet] IPv6=20 MANET Address Prefix

Hello=20 list,

 

can=20 someone point me to the draft or rfc where the manet address prefix=20 fec0:0:0:ffff::/64 was defined?

Thanks=20 in advance.

 

Regards,=20 Nico

 

 

 

-----

Nico=20 Bayer

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3FDF7.39F84FF0-- _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Feb 28 17:08:51 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05676 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:08:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AxCdE-0006rN-2z for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:08:24 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1SM8OLi026365 for manet-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:08:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AxCdD-0006rA-U9 for manet-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:08:23 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05673 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:08:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AxCdB-0006Za-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:08:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AxCcF-0006Uq-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:07:23 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AxCc1-0006QW-00 for manet-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:07:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AxCbt-0006Jg-Jz; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:07:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AxCbI-0006Iv-4i for manet@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:06:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05651 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:06:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AxCbG-0006Q2-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:06:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AxCaJ-0006LA-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:05:23 -0500 Received: from amber.crhc.uiuc.edu ([130.126.143.254]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AxCZN-0006Bb-00 for manet@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:04:25 -0500 Received: from chaos.crhc.uiuc.edu (chaos.crhc.uiuc.edu [130.126.143.233]) by amber.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1SM6RqA014227 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:06:27 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (nhv@localhost) by chaos.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1SLxmW32202 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:59:48 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: chaos.crhc.uiuc.edu: nhv owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:59:48 -0600 (CST) From: "Nitin H. Vaidya" To: MANET mailing list Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [manet] Re: manet digest, Vol 1 #748 - 6 msgs Sender: manet-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: manet-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >> I am surprised if the RREQ/RREP packets' successes on marginal links >> are only occasional. I am interested to hear more about that. I have >> pessimistically assumed that RREQ/RREP discovery frequently yields paths >> that carry small RREQ/RREP packets fine, but which perform badly with >> longish TCP segments. You can improve the odds by padding the RREQ/RREP packets to make the size comparable with TCP packets. This is not a perfect solution either, since not all packets are large (e.g., ACKs), so it might make sense to use one route for TCP data and another for ACKs. Need more refined information on link quality though. TCP ACKs are cumulative, so that can tolerate greater losses (once the TCP window builds up). You mentioned OSPF style protocol -- that won't be sufficient if you consider impact of route failure on TCP. Need some additional mechanism to let TCP recover quickly after route repair (since route repair may take a while with strictly proactive protocols). - nitin _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet