From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sun Jan 2 16:15:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C54F28C0EF; Sun, 2 Jan 2011 16:15:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.591 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.591 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hIzYKXVyzxR1; Sun, 2 Jan 2011 16:15:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F1128C0EB; Sun, 2 Jan 2011 16:15:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.10 Message-ID: <20110103001501.24519.35160.idtracker@localhost> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2011 16:15:01 -0800 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 00:15:02 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt Pages : 70 Date : 2011-01-02 This memo defines the Management Information Base (MIB) for configuring and managing the Optimized Link State Routing protocol version 2 (OLSRv2). The Optimized Link State Routing MIB is structured into state information, performance metrics, and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues of the routing protocol. Different levels of compliance allow implementers to use smaller subsets of all defined objects, allowing for this MIB to be deployed on more constrained routers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2011-01-02160209.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Mon Jan 3 02:15:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DAAB28C114; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 02:15:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TVUHg9Yi+G6c; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 02:15:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F9628C113; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 02:15:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.10 Message-ID: <20110103101501.6623.98418.idtracker@localhost> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 02:15:01 -0800 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:15:02 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Pages : 64 Date : 2011-01-03 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance information and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues during neighbor discovery. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2011-01-03020318.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From robert.g.cole@us.army.mil Mon Jan 3 06:24:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A26428C0FB for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 06:24:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.849 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.416, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D0-SMrlWwsF7 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 06:24:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ddokavsgwhub005.conus.army.mil (ddokavsgwhub005.conus.army.mil [143.85.192.27]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1593828C11B for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 06:24:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=us.army.mil; i=Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil; q=dns/txt; s=conusdkim; t=1294064782; x=1325600782; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:from:to; z=MIME-Version:=201.0|Subject:=20FW:=20[manet]=20I-D=20Act ion:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt=20(UNCLASSIFIED) |Date:=20Mon,=203=20Jan=202011=2009:26:00=20-0500 |Message-ID:=20<4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DD COBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil>|From:=20"Cole,=20Robert=20 G=20Dr=20CIV=20USA"=20|To:=20< manet@ietf.org>; bh=LN+jHcJitJtH6YwByafSg5QHM4vxXLGSi5j7Z1twcxQ=; b=b5DGlV88CNZP4uDk/LAcoIJScnelil3FhlIy83TaWIU+eIRA//toBTj7 qfaCbjcdBL+GhzBXmbHS0Wcz4FHHwvKziPDJdzZqkc9XsDXwLfNvonsqO gBRmGpx6PEqhm0PAz7PF2pEmMbp+Lk+LgZ8jJtbY/S8LJhR1VIJAvUR3Y M=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,267,1291593600"; d="url'?scan'208";a="137384608" Received: from unknown (HELO DDOKBH010HUB005.nae.ds.army.mil) ([143.82.0.36]) by ddokavsgwhub005.conus.army.mil with ESMTP; 03 Jan 2011 14:26:17 +0000 Received: from DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.15]) by DDOKBH010HUB005.nae.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Jan 2011 08:26:17 -0600 Received: from DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.39]) by DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Jan 2011 09:26:16 -0500 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB52.252E05D9" x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 09:26:00 -0500 Message-ID: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurL5G3euDGmjTlSPWIXtnZgHRUQgAIWv0A From: "Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2011 14:26:16.0383 (UTC) FILETIME=[2E5EE4F0:01CBAB52] Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 14:24:16 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB52.252E05D9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues remain: 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to publication. Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Pages : 64 Date : 2011-01-03 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance information and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues during neighbor discovery. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB52.252E05D9 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.URL" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.URL Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.URL" W0ludGVybmV0U2hvcnRjdXRdDQpVUkw9ZnRwOi8vZnRwLmlldGYub3JnL2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0 cy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1hbmV0LW5oZHAtbWliLTA3LnR4dA0K ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB52.252E05D9-- From L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Mon Jan 3 06:37:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1DC328C121 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 06:37:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.164 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.731, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BidzYxeSlEEI for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 06:37:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail72.messagelabs.com (mail72.messagelabs.com [193.109.255.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75BDB28C120 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 06:37:18 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-8.tower-72.messagelabs.com!1294065564!31678058!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.43] Received: (qmail 8282 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2011 14:39:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.43) by server-8.tower-72.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Jan 2011 14:39:25 -0000 Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.2.9]) by EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.43]) with mapi; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 14:39:24 +0000 From: To: , Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 14:37:13 +0000 Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurL5G3euDGmjTlSPWIXtnZgHRUQgAIWv0AAACuDSQ= Message-ID: References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> In-Reply-To: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 14:37:20 -0000 How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be reconci= led with the percentage link quality metrics in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? thanks, Lloyd Wood http://sat-net.com/L.Wood ________________________________________ From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, Ro= bert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UN= CLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues remain: 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to publication. Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Pages : 64 Date : 2011-01-03 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance information and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues during neighbor discovery. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE From robert.g.cole@us.army.mil Mon Jan 3 07:00:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C80F3A69DC for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:00:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.328 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.328 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.729, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lokLQCY2hAM2 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:00:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from ddokavsgwhub002.conus.army.mil (ddokavsgwhub002.conus.army.mil [143.85.192.18]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 248893A6935 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:00:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=us.army.mil; i=Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil; q=dns/txt; s=conusdkim; t=1294066986; x=1325602986; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:from:to:cc; z=MIME-Version:=201.0|Subject:=20FW:=20[manet]=20I-D=20Act ion:draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt=20(UNCLASSIFIED) |Date:=20Mon,=203=20Jan=202011=2010:02:03=20-0500 |Message-ID:=20<4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E4F@DD COBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil>|From:=20"Cole,=20Robert=20 G=20Dr=20CIV=20USA"=20|To:=20< manet@ietf.org>|Cc:=20,=0D=0A=09"Tho mas=20Heide=20Clausen"=20; bh=PvS05egFeoQIqv1PLOoNXDRj3pBmREvtOQqCT7IuLgg=; b=kTPUFKdQnA/kQmfp7TxecrrnpsKnuRCxDBCnkRHq0syxtHb+ka/H+/i8 DljPER3Kjk46UVje237JeWnME1VB0VALDtg9AOUi+SgVdMUN3xSe4EkZM uorfj6L/Hovl0cwL9sqsUzgbnV6PoY0Dl5bj12JytrvHCVo+x1ud9er9O E=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,267,1291593600"; d="url'?scan'208";a="104869249" Received: from unknown (HELO DDOKBH110HUB006.dahq.ds.army.mil) ([143.82.0.37]) by ddokavsgwhub002.conus.army.mil with ESMTP; 03 Jan 2011 15:02:59 +0000 Received: from DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.15]) by DDOKBH110HUB006.dahq.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Jan 2011 09:02:59 -0600 Received: from DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.39]) by DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:02:56 -0500 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB57.2E3EC352" x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:02:03 -0500 Message-ID: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E4F@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: Acuq26FVrV+SM4waQHKojGN7YOFhfgAeuCBA From: "Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2011 15:02:56.0490 (UTC) FILETIME=[4DBC94A0:01CBAB57] Cc: Thomas Heide Clausen Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 15:00:59 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB57.2E3EC352 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE We have updated the OLSRv2-MIB draft. We completed the Notifications Group and believe we have addressed all the issues identified in earlier drafts. We have further cleaned up most of the issues surfaced by 'smilint'. Several considerations remain: + This draft needs a good WG review to make sure it has the appropriate functionality. + This draft is co-dependent on the NHDP-MIB. As such, we must wait for the publication of the NHDP-MIB draft prior to moving this draft forward. So now is a good time to do a good, thoughtful review while waiting for the NHDP-MIB draft. Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2011 7:15 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt Pages : 70 Date : 2011-01-02 This memo defines the Management Information Base (MIB) for configuring and managing the Optimized Link State Routing protocol version 2 (OLSRv2). The Optimized Link State Routing MIB is structured into state information, performance metrics, and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues of the routing protocol. Different levels of compliance allow implementers to use smaller subsets of all defined objects, allowing for this MIB to be deployed on more constrained routers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB57.2E3EC352 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.URL" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.URL Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-03.URL" W0ludGVybmV0U2hvcnRjdXRdDQpVUkw9ZnRwOi8vZnRwLmlldGYub3JnL2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0 cy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1hbmV0LW9sc3J2Mi1taWItMDMudHh0DQo= ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBAB57.2E3EC352-- From robert.g.cole@us.army.mil Mon Jan 3 07:09:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04AD3A69EB for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:09:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.666, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3tnBJXgUwVYg for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:08:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from ddokavsgwhub002.conus.army.mil (ddokavsgwhub002.conus.army.mil [143.85.192.18]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BD933A69E9 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=us.army.mil; i=Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil; q=dns/txt; s=conusdkim; t=1294067467; x=1325603467; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to; z=MIME-Version:=201.0|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted- printable|Subject:=20RE:=20[manet]=20FW:=20I-D=20Action:d raft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED)|Date:=20Mon ,=203=20Jan=202011=2010:10:18=20-0500|Message-ID:=20<4B87 393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds .army.mil>|In-Reply-To:=20|References:=20<4B873 93F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds. army.mil>=20|From:=20"Cole,=20Robert=20G=20Dr =20CIV=20USA"=20|To:=20,=0D=0A=09; bh=TWNNCFBKgGKkzJ4DQg0+s9KIzzYS23R0feFtUQ2c9es=; b=CPlyXDbhYWRT4L+VDpGjHaxs0NOjaA8LnWLLTzZcJrZpsL803QCJ6Mqo z4rtcfHatKLnFMt4thzs+iMPk8vo/PQSv+HMNEU/7xf+T/1W+Ja0A7Rt0 DUjpyYAjknsI8YyLjzA0WuINn6CnTzr7fTgNI/GdgWA7boaFv4T7XSz0F 4=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,267,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="104870817" Received: from unknown (HELO DDOKBH010HUB005.nae.ds.army.mil) ([143.82.0.36]) by ddokavsgwhub002.conus.army.mil with ESMTP; 03 Jan 2011 15:11:05 +0000 Received: from DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.15]) by DDOKBH010HUB005.nae.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Jan 2011 09:11:06 -0600 Received: from DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.39]) by DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:11:04 -0500 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 V6.5 Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:10:18 -0500 Message-ID: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurL5G3euDGmjTlSPWIXtnZgHRUQgAIWv0AAACuDSQAAQ/DEA== References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> From: "Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2011 15:11:04.0415 (UTC) FILETIME=[709006F0:01CBAB58] Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 15:09:01 -0000 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Lloyd, Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the NHDP draft, i.e.: "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk]=20 Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? thanks, Lloyd Wood http://sat-net.com/L.Wood ________________________________________ From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues remain: 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to publication. Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Pages : 64 Date : 2011-01-03 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance information and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues during neighbor discovery. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE From ulrich@herberg.name Mon Jan 3 07:12:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EE03A69F3 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:12:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.573 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.763, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fva8+kuGzQlU for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:12:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF923A69E5 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:12:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by qyk34 with SMTP id 34so15234406qyk.10 for ; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 07:15:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.6.144 with SMTP id 16mr19553955qaz.159.1294067703167; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 07:15:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.182.193 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 07:15:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 16:15:03 +0100 Message-ID: From: Ulrich Herberg To: "Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cb05ec33b030498f29d79 Cc: manet@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 15:12:58 -0000 --0015175cb05ec33b030498f29d79 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Lloyd, I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. Ulrich On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA < Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil> wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > Lloyd, > > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: > > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." > > Thanks, > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? > > thanks, > > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: > > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. > > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to > publication. > > Thanks, > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. > > > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 > > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues > during neighbor discovery. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > --0015175cb05ec33b030498f29d79 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Lloyd,

I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so = we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to= also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion= on that.

Ulrich

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM= , Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA <Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil> wrote:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Lloyd,

Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the
NHDP draft, i.e.:

"Link quality information is defined in this specification as a
=A0 normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one,
=A0 inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality.&q= uot;

Thanks,
Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailt= o:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM
To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf= .org
Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D
Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED)

How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be
reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ?

thanks,

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/= L.Wood
________________________________________
From: manet-bounces@ietf.org = [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On B= ehalf Of Cole,
Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.= Cole@us.army.mil]
Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26
To: manet@ietf.org
Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt
(UNCLASSIFIED)

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. =A0It is now in a reasonably final
state. =A0We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues
found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). =A0Two issu= es
remain:

1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB
experts. =A0We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers= .

2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality
objects. =A0Float32 is currently in draft form. =A0We cannot finalize our draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the
Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to
publication.

Thanks,
Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: manet-bounces@ietf.org = [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org=
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
Cc: manet@ietf.org
Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF.


=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Definition of Managed Objects f= or the
Neighborhood Discovery Protocol
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : U. Herberg, et al.
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt<= br> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 64
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2011-01-03

This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.
In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the
Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. =A0The MIB
defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance
information and notifications. =A0This additional state and performance
information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues
during neighbor discovery.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mane= t-nhdp-mib-07.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp= .ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
manet@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

--0015175cb05ec33b030498f29d79-- From L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Mon Jan 3 10:49:22 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F9FF3A6A99 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:49:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.127 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.127 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.694, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fDPTzASd2pRD for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:49:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail82.messagelabs.com (mail82.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E35DA3A6A98 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:49:20 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-82.messagelabs.com!1294080687!41084559!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.43] Received: (qmail 996 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2011 18:51:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.43) by server-2.tower-82.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Jan 2011 18:51:27 -0000 Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.2.9]) by EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.43]) with mapi; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 18:51:27 +0000 From: To: Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 18:51:25 +0000 Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBg== Message-ID: <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: manet@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 18:49:22 -0000 Thanks for the context. DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pret= ty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires les= s processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number a= ctually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place= ? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > Lloyd, >=20 > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not = change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use va= lues between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. >=20 > Ulrich >=20 > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > Lloyd, >=20 > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: >=20 > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? >=20 > thanks, >=20 > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: >=20 > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. >=20 > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to > publication. >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 >=20 > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues > during neighbor discovery. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 Lloyd Wood L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk http://sat-net.com/L.Wood From ulrich@herberg.name Mon Jan 3 11:02:57 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A873A6AD6 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:02:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.497 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.686, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ji+jn2YG5j-S for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:02:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8F993A6AD7 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:02:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by qyj19 with SMTP id 19so14662724qyj.10 for ; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:04:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.89.69 with SMTP id d5mr20168784qam.59.1294081496529; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:04:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.182.193 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:04:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:04:56 +0100 Message-ID: From: Ulrich Herberg To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 19:02:57 -0000 Lloyd, as far as I see it, NHDP does not impose any specific representation of the link quality, such as 32-bit float, it just says that it should be between 0 and 1. Thus, an implementation could also use a single octet to store the link quality (and for example encode the link quality as: value/256, or use an encoding similar to the one in TimeTLVs). This would depend on the implementation. Since the link quality values are not exchanged between routers, that should not pose any interoperability issues. But maybe one of the NHDP authors could clarify that. For the MIB, we thought that it is more flexible to use a 32-bit float instead of a single unsigned byte (and then dividing the value by 256), because it gives more precision, and we need to accommodate all sort of implementations and link quality values. Ulrich On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:51 PM, wrote: > > Thanks for the context. > > DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pr= etty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires l= ess processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit floa= t. > > What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number= actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal pla= ce? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) > > On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > > > Lloyd, > > > > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will no= t change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use = values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. > > > > Ulrich > > > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > > > > Lloyd, > > > > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with > > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > > NHDP draft, i.e.: > > > > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > > =A0 normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > > =A0 inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality= ." > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > > > > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be > > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in > > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? > > > > thanks, > > > > Lloyd Wood > > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > > ________________________________________ > > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole= , > > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > > To: manet@ietf.org > > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > (UNCLASSIFIED) > > > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > > > > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. =A0It is now in a reasonably final > > state. =A0We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts= . > > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues > > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). =A0Two issues > > remain: > > > > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > > experts. =A0We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers= . > > > > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality > > objects. =A0Float32 is currently in draft form. =A0We cannot finalize o= ur > > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to > > publication. > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: manet@ietf.org > > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group o= f > > the IETF. > > > > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Definition of Managed Object= s for the > > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : U. Herberg, et al. > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.t= xt > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 64 > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2011-01-03 > > > > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) fo= r > > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the > > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. =A0The MIB > > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > > information and notifications. =A0This additional state and performance > > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues > > during neighbor discovery. > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > Internet-Draft. > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > > > > > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > Lloyd Wood > L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > > > From thomas.dubuisson@gmail.com Mon Jan 3 11:14:45 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F5643A6AF0 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:14:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NDogIiKFb2hG for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:14:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650123A6AE2 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:14:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by wwa36 with SMTP id 36so13669696wwa.13 for ; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:16:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Xi78Grv6r/99u9JNJj4zOAmWP5U+BMyiqVp8J9FJJPg=; b=tF90qpjE03pznamWgJ9J6V8RZpPQDK+aErgLHsDQpSTleo/d1Tk85QgZ2sv6FJaz9+ R96QpSRhL6c6JWiSj7eGiDFSDo3PM+aA6aVOppJovYIfiS+mLkgGZqx09uLtthL7caNS klrKVQhpYI3ITPnZgxp11aaE6wHb16FdL7j0A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=jq5dXxas1gVEluYxNruoMXV1eNc7SMBWG/NVlnNqabE4qmzqLHBf7/mRp7GRrj0jSM CMrfKiC0UUofvKP6kQU61yH1NHdd7d8Q3x79cGHNWJUef3xUKo2Y4wZI+qX2TZM2Hq6r 5pNffP9s6ZYvtV8hd7baVImRyfp6kgG0yzhaE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.51.137 with SMTP id b9mr8752615wec.54.1294082210945; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:16:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.253.145 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:16:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:16:50 -0800 Message-ID: From: Thomas DuBuisson To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 19:14:45 -0000 > DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. > > What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) Thank you for bringing this up, extra dependencies for NHDP negatively effect OLSRv2 and DYMO which already have many dependencies (NHDP, NHDP-MIB, PacketBB, PacketBB-Sec, timetlv (5497), jitter (5148), etc)... it's good to see Ulrich say Float is just a possible representation. It's slightly off topic for this list, but related to the point here - does anyone in IETF-manet have a visual representation of necessary and optional dependencies, perhaps rooted at OLSRv2 or DYMO? I find the prospect of implementing either protocol slightly daunting for a hobby project, which is unfortunate as AODV and OLSRv1 struck me as ideal for hobby hacking. Cheers, Thomas M. DuBuisson From jdean@itd.nrl.navy.mil Mon Jan 3 12:05:23 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4203C3A6B64 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 12:05:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A1t82qnZHe1Z for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 12:05:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.83.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE43E3A6B63 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 12:05:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id p03K7NHH010503; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 15:07:24 -0500 Received: (from bebe [132.250.93.61]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SMSSMTP 4.1.16.48) with SMTP id M2011010315072220617 ; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 15:07:22 -0500 From: "Justin Dean" To: "'Thomas DuBuisson'" , References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 15:03:50 -0500 Message-ID: <007c01cbab81$56f5eec0$04e1cc40$@nrl.navy.mil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AcuretNTAoclvvJiT0yqLV/5xwFFTwABk/DA Content-Language: en-us Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 20:05:23 -0000 http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/69/slides/manet-2.pdf It's a little old and in need of an update but this should be a good starting point in understanding the document relationships. Justin > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Thomas DuBuisson > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 2:17 PM > To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib- > 07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > > > DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is > actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, > and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a > fraction in 32-bit float. > > > > What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point > number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better > decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) > > Thank you for bringing this up, extra dependencies for NHDP negatively > effect OLSRv2 and DYMO which already have many dependencies (NHDP, > NHDP-MIB, PacketBB, PacketBB-Sec, timetlv (5497), jitter (5148), > etc)... it's good to see Ulrich say Float is just a possible > representation. > > It's slightly off topic for this list, but related to the point here - > does anyone in IETF-manet have a visual representation of necessary > and optional dependencies, perhaps rooted at OLSRv2 or DYMO? I find > the prospect of implementing either protocol slightly daunting for a > hobby project, which is unfortunate as AODV and OLSRv1 struck me as > ideal for hobby hacking. > > Cheers, > Thomas M. DuBuisson > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jan 4 03:46:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809353A69B7 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:46:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.516 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.083, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AyRZXud5u8Gl for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:46:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BE43A6B7A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:46:56 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,271,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="107820231" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 11:49:02 +0000 Received: from glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1102.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.193]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p04Bn1P3020160; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:49:02 GMT Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:49:01 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:49:01 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) thread-index: AcurL5G3euDGmjTlSPWIXtnZgHRUQgAIWv0AAACuDSQAAQ/DEAArSDZQ References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: "Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2011 11:49:01.0766 (UTC) FILETIME=[61505660:01CBAC05] Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:46:58 -0000 Also note that link quality in NHDP is not a metric (that term is not used, it's not additive etc.) Link metric will be an orthogonal concept in OLSRv2. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA Sent: 03 January 2011 15:10 To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk; manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Lloyd, Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the NHDP draft, i.e.: "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? thanks, Lloyd Wood http://sat-net.com/L.Wood ________________________________________ From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues remain: 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to publication. Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Pages : 64 Date : 2011-01-03 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance information and notifications. This additional state and performance information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues during neighbor discovery. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jan 4 03:55:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE1063A6B7A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:55:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.866, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TEzMCw-og3iS for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:55:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5D73A6B70 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:55:25 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,271,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="107823254" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 11:57:32 +0000 Received: from glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1103.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.194]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p04BvU87027281; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:57:31 GMT Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:57:30 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:57:29 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) thread-index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQ References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2011 11:57:30.0475 (UTC) FILETIME=[90872BB0:01CBAC06] Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:55:28 -0000 The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected criticism is also misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in the interval 0 to 1, and it's up to an implementer to decide how precise he needs it. In terms of NHDP itself all that matters is where the value stands relative to two thresholds. However the use of a value that may be more precise than this allows implementers to use the approaches described in RFC 3626 for OLSR, with whatever precision they require. as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 To: ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. Thanks for the context. DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > Lloyd, > > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. > > Ulrich > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > Lloyd, > > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: > > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." > > Thanks, > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? > > thanks, > > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: > > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. > > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to > publication. > > Thanks, > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. > > > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 > > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues > during neighbor discovery. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > Lloyd Wood L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk http://sat-net.com/L.Wood _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jan 4 04:06:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2900A3A6A29 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:06:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.238 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.238 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.361, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TOcrGuHWiGYs for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:06:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95BDE3A6B7A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:06:44 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,271,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="107827314" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 12:08:51 +0000 Received: from glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1102.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.193]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p04C8oYM003602; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:08:50 GMT Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:08:50 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:08:49 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <007c01cbab81$56f5eec0$04e1cc40$@nrl.navy.mil> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW:I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) thread-index: AcuretNTAoclvvJiT0yqLV/5xwFFTwABk/DAACForIA= References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> <007c01cbab81$56f5eec0$04e1cc40$@nrl.navy.mil> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: "Justin Dean" , "Thomas DuBuisson" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2011 12:08:50.0462 (UTC) FILETIME=[25D4F3E0:01CBAC08] Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW:I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:06:46 -0000 Essentially what are now NHDP and RFCs 5148, 5444 and 5197 all were originally part of OLSRv2. But NHDP and the packet/message format were spun into separate documents because others (notably SMF and DYMO, but now also DLEP) wanted to use them. The other two needed reference from NHDP and what is now OLSRv2, and so were spun-off separately to avoid duplication. So OLSRv2 necessarily requires all of these except jitter (RFC 5148) which is optional (but strongly advised for some MAC layers). The separation and some generalisation (the "multiplexing" approach in RFC 5444) has in some ways complicated the presenattion of OLSRv2, in other ways made it easier. The same applies to other changes from OLSRv1 to OLSRv2, some easier (no MIDs or HNAs), some more complicated (for various reasons). -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Justin Dean Sent: 03 January 2011 20:04 To: 'Thomas DuBuisson'; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW:I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/69/slides/manet-2.pdf It's a little old and in need of an update but this should be a good starting point in understanding the document relationships. Justin > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Thomas DuBuisson > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 2:17 PM > To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib- > 07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > > > DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is > actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, > and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a > fraction in 32-bit float. > > > > What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point > number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better > decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) > > Thank you for bringing this up, extra dependencies for NHDP negatively > effect OLSRv2 and DYMO which already have many dependencies (NHDP, > NHDP-MIB, PacketBB, PacketBB-Sec, timetlv (5497), jitter (5148), > etc)... it's good to see Ulrich say Float is just a possible > representation. > > It's slightly off topic for this list, but related to the point here - > does anyone in IETF-manet have a visual representation of necessary > and optional dependencies, perhaps rooted at OLSRv2 or DYMO? I find > the prospect of implementing either protocol slightly daunting for a > hobby project, which is unfortunate as AODV and OLSRv1 struck me as > ideal for hobby hacking. > > Cheers, > Thomas M. DuBuisson > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Tue Jan 4 04:09:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473DD3A6B70 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:09:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.094 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.094 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.661, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uUjenxmQfuyS for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:09:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail72.messagelabs.com (mail72.messagelabs.com [193.109.255.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3DEC3A69B7 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:09:17 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-72.messagelabs.com!1294143084!36286783!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.43] Received: (qmail 15113 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2011 12:11:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.43) by server-9.tower-72.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 4 Jan 2011 12:11:24 -0000 Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.2.9]) by EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.43]) with mapi; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:11:24 +0000 From: To: , Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:11:32 +0000 Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lA= Message-ID: References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:09:24 -0000 NHDP's choice of 0 to 1 still has to be represented as a floating point num= ber, so my criticism stands - and holds for OLSR's link quality in section = 13 of RFC3626 as well. Yes, it could be represented less accurately as a compromise with integer d= ivision (e.g /256, as mentioned earlier.) 0 to 100 makes some sense as an equivalent for avoiding processing/arithmet= ic overhead at the receiver - and for then avoiding the ambiguity of transl= ating between different representations of 0 to 1, with varying rounding er= rors introduced by integer division/different floating points etc. -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 11:57 To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLAS= SIFIED) Importance: High The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected criticism is a= lso misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in the interval 0 to 1, and it's= up to an implementer to decide how precise he needs it. In terms of NHDP i= tself all that matters is where the value stands relative to two thresholds= . However the use of a value that may be more precise than this allows implem= enters to use the approaches described in RFC 3626 for OLSR, with whatever = precision they require. as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, = Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of L= .Wood@surrey.ac.uk Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 To: ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 Thanks for the context. DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pret= ty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires les= s processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number a= ctually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place= ? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > Lloyd, >=20 > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also us= e values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. >=20 > Ulrich >=20 > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > Lloyd, >=20 > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: >=20 > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be=20 > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? >=20 > thanks, >=20 > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final=20 > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues=20 > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: >=20 > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. >=20 > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality=20 > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our=20 > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to=20 > publication. >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf=20 > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 >=20 > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the=20 > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB=20 > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance=20 > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues=20 > during neighbor discovery. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 Lloyd Wood L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk http://sat-net.com/L.Wood _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient a= nd may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please del= ete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute= its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Tue Jan 4 04:10:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51E063A6B9D for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:10:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.064 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.631, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hfg3Nqts+Eet for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:10:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail78.messagelabs.com (mail78.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CA43A6BAC for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:10:10 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-78.messagelabs.com!1294143137!48915337!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.43] Received: (qmail 8790 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2011 12:12:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.43) by server-5.tower-78.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 4 Jan 2011 12:12:17 -0000 Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.2.9]) by EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.43]) with mapi; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:12:16 +0000 From: To: , , Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:12:26 +0000 Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurL5G3euDGmjTlSPWIXtnZgHRUQgAIWv0AAACuDSQAAQ/DEAArSDZQAADfVKA= Message-ID: References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:10:12 -0000 Good point. A metric using units is meaningful; a dimensionless indication = of 'quality' rather less so... -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 11:49 To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASS= IFIED) Importance: High Also note that link quality in NHDP is not a metric (that term is not used,= it's not additive etc.) Link metric will be an orthogonal concept in OLSRv= 2. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, = Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of C= ole, Robert G Dr CIV USA Sent: 03 January 2011 15:10 To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk; manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Lloyd, Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, i= nstead there are meant to reconcile with the NHDP draft, i.e.: "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be reconci= led with the percentage link quality metrics in draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? thanks, Lloyd Wood http://sat-net.com/L.Wood ________________________________________ From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, Ro= bert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 To: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final state.= We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues found b= y running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues remain: 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB exp= erts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality objec= ts. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our draft unti= l the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to publicatio= n. Thanks, Bob -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of I= nternet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of th= e IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Pages : 64 Date : 2011-01-03 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for us= e with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the Neigh= borhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB defined in = this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance information an= d notifications. This additional state and performance information is usef= ul to troubleshoot problems and performance issues during neighbor discover= y. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementa= tion to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient a= nd may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please del= ete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute= its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jan 4 04:22:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 225473A6B7A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:22:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.207 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.207 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.773, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ktgNqs-R0bLv for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:22:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BCE73A6A29 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:22:03 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,272,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="107832705" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 12:24:10 +0000 Received: from glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1103.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.194]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p04CO90U014057; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:24:09 GMT Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:24:09 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:24:08 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) thread-index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAF0g4A== References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2011 12:24:09.0693 (UTC) FILETIME=[49BC78D0:01CBAC0A] Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:22:06 -0000 0 to 1 does not have to be represented as a floating point number. A fixed point number is just as valid a representation. The 0 to 100 you are proposing is just such a fixed point number, just you've called the top value 100 rather than 1. As internally all that matters is comparisons there is no difference, except you've imposed an arbitrary value of 100. When you refer to "the receiver" you seem to be under the misapprehension that the link quality values are transmitted. they are not. In particular they are not included in a HELLO message. They are defined in NHDP as limited to the router they are used on, so there shouldn't be any of the issues you note (possible effort in converting to float - which is not specified in NHDP - aside). (You could collect link quality values across a network. But those would be meaningless except in comparison with the specified thresholds, and then all that matters is ordering.) --=20 Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 12:12 To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 NHDP's choice of 0 to 1 still has to be represented as a floating point number, so my criticism stands - and holds for OLSR's link quality in section 13 of RFC3626 as well. Yes, it could be represented less accurately as a compromise with integer division (e.g /256, as mentioned earlier.) 0 to 100 makes some sense as an equivalent for avoiding processing/arithmetic overhead at the receiver - and for then avoiding the ambiguity of translating between different representations of 0 to 1, with varying rounding errors introduced by integer division/different floating points etc. -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 11:57 To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Importance: High The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected criticism is also misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in the interval 0 to 1, and it's up to an implementer to decide how precise he needs it. In terms of NHDP itself all that matters is where the value stands relative to two thresholds. However the use of a value that may be more precise than this allows implementers to use the approaches described in RFC 3626 for OLSR, with whatever precision they require. as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 To: ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 Thanks for the context. DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > Lloyd, >=20 > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. >=20 > Ulrich >=20 > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > Lloyd, >=20 > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: >=20 > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be=20 > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? >=20 > thanks, >=20 > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final=20 > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues=20 > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: >=20 > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. >=20 > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality=20 > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our=20 > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to=20 > publication. >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 >=20 > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the=20 > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB=20 > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance=20 > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues=20 > during neighbor discovery. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 Lloyd Wood L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk http://sat-net.com/L.Wood _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de Tue Jan 4 04:22:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593D43A6BD6 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:22:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.946 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vtue9BpRsWPX for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:22:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF833A6BC5 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:22:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fgan.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa5wa-0000vT-AX; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:24:52 +0100 Received: from mailserv1.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.96.101] helo=mailserv1.lorien.fkie.fgan.de) by mailhost.fgan.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa5wa-0000yq-27; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:24:52 +0100 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:24:51 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01CBAC12.C1403330" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAJvFIA== References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Rogge Henning" To: , , X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.96.5/12477/Tue Jan 4 11:11:05 2011) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de X-Scan-Signature: 7aacaf3d2f0489a8707a5bcbd741a7d8 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:22:51 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01CBAC12.C1403330 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org]=20 >=20 > NHDP's choice of 0 to 1 still has to be represented as a=20 > floating point number, so my criticism stands - and holds for=20 > OLSR's link quality in section 13 of RFC3626 as well. >=20 > Yes, it could be represented less accurately as a compromise=20 > with integer division (e.g /256, as mentioned earlier.) >=20 > 0 to 100 makes some sense as an equivalent for avoiding=20 > processing/arithmetic overhead at the receiver - and for then=20 > avoiding the ambiguity of translating between different=20 > representations of 0 to 1, with varying rounding errors=20 > introduced by integer division/different floating points etc. If I remember the "link quality" in NHDP right, it's just an internal = value calculated to decide when a link should be declared "active". I don't = think it is ever transmitted to other nodes, so both the range or = representation of this value it totally implementation specific without breaking compatiblity. You can use a float between 0 and 1, you can use integer arithmetic = between 0 and any fixed number or even something else, it doesn't really matter = as long as your link hysteresis algorithm behaves well. In some cases you can even use the OLSRv2 link metric to trigger your hysteresis. Henning Rogge -- Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20 Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, =A0 Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)=20 > [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com] > Sent: 04 January 2011 11:57 > To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D=20 > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > Importance: High >=20 > The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected=20 > criticism is also misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in=20 > the interval 0 to 1, and it's up to an implementer to decide=20 > how precise he needs it. In terms of NHDP itself all that=20 > matters is where the value stands relative to two thresholds. > However the use of a value that may be more precise than this=20 > allows implementers to use the approaches described in RFC=20 > 3626 for OLSR, with whatever precision they require. >=20 > as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. >=20 > -- > Christopher Dearlove > Technology Leader, Communications Group > Communications and Networks Capability > BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre > West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK > Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 >=20 > BAE Systems (Operations) Limited > Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough=20 > Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered=20 > in England & Wales No: 1996687 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org]=20 > On Behalf Of L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 > To: ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 >=20 > *** WARNING *** >=20 > This message has originated outside your organisation, > either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 > Keep this in mind if you answer this message. > =20 >=20 > Thanks for the context. >=20 > DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is=20 > actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char=20 > or integer, and requires less processing power than=20 > representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. >=20 > What does introducing the increased complexity of a=20 > floating-point number actually give as a benefit? Do you=20 > really need third or better decimal place? (This is a=20 > criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) >=20 > On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: >=20 > > Lloyd, > >=20 > > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will > not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP=20 > draft to also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't=20 > have a strong opinion on that. > >=20 > > Ulrich > >=20 > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA > wrote: > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > >=20 > > Lloyd, > >=20 > > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with=20 > > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with > the > > NHDP draft, i.e.: > >=20 > > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link > quality." > >=20 > > Thanks, > > Bob > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > >=20 > > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be=20 > > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in=20 > > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? > >=20 > > thanks, > >=20 > > Lloyd Wood > > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > > ________________________________________ > > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Cole, > > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > > To: manet@ietf.org > > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > (UNCLASSIFIED) > >=20 > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > >=20 > > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a=20 > reasonably final=20 > > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from=20 > previous drafts. > > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues=20 > > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > > remain: > >=20 > > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside > MIB > > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG=20 > reviewers. > >=20 > > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the=20 > link quality=20 > > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot=20 > finalize our=20 > > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to=20 > > publication. > >=20 > > Thanks, > > Bob > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf=20 > > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: manet@ietf.org > > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > >=20 > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 > > directories. > > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks=20 > Working Group > of > > the IETF. > >=20 > >=20 > > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > > Pages : 64 > > Date : 2011-01-03 > >=20 > > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) > for > > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > > In particular, it describes objects for configuring=20 > parameters of the=20 > > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router.=20 > The MIB=20 > > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, > performance > > information and notifications. This additional state and=20 > performance=20 > > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and=20 > performance issues=20 > > during neighbor discovery. > >=20 > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >=20 > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > Internet-Draft. > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > >=20 > >=20 > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > > Caveats: NONE > >=20 > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > >=20 >=20 > Lloyd Wood > L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 >=20 > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the=20 > intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not=20 > the intended recipient please delete it from your system and=20 > notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose=20 > or distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01CBAC12.C1403330 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYAzCCA58w ggKHoAMCAQICASYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRz Y2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsTFlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMT GkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBDQSAyMB4XDTk5MDcwOTEyMTEwMFoXDTE5MDcwOTIzNTkw MFowcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsT FlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMTGkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBD QSAyMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAqwujNeCLKRSxFIWvPBDkOW81XUqu 3ephjZVJ9G9koxpgZqSpQCKE2dSl5XiTDmgBrblNXDrO07ioQkDfz6O6gllqkhusHJraCCslJ/lp I0fx4Ossepv1EwLQfjR8wp48AFmr9doM9TI8K6xQ2tbD3oOUyqgMmTIOCEhWW2r72uFYWAFJX3JB PBUGAY5draq4k7TNnuun6GotUjTbOu9cdVHa2/Mx+e5xmDLEVBVEDPmbVe2t3xgIoKOGiknuUwWP GUzV3lh5m9JqHEKrxdWnz2gPluThYZh2YciRfNY+AOKRUIfhnQrmrZfSHcY6fcu82gM01Y5bAfVq B7cWtm5KfwIDAQABo0IwQDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUMcN5G7r1U9cX4Il6LRdsCrMrnTMwDwYDVR0TBAgw BgEB/wIBBTAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAJRkWa05ZOcp6xP+WsOL E1fIBCTwdHfAYONn++mJpoO/loJ8btTDPe+egG67KbSYerE7VOs5F0d+Go4L/B8xWTEEss4X8yzH YjZV4iLYiVW0mEiqZPrWHDbYRHhaWiM6V5f1ejBPrp9qTEsrjqAD4z7gqdTSe9KzqOJyPK2e/4BZ 5JtFtPY7sM05GZgy5eohYZDkMSGONLH3LzVKhRDa54o3Ib5ZY+DyhYgxU9RUFIVwefQuBncndS8f uIr5/sW62Dbkg+znZbe/Y1rzRq+BlDfUQYzWI9Yez/VoG0Rjolq6pzVZoeVwBZsOI1eZlAptujlj KIaS8xiE2PvRzwVWZFcwggQuMIIDFqADAgECAgIBDDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBxMQswCQYDVQQG EwJERTEcMBoGA1UEChMTRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBBRzEfMB0GA1UECxMWVC1UZWxlU2VjIFRy dXN0IENlbnRlcjEjMCEGA1UEAxMaRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBSb290IENBIDIwHhcNMDcxMjA1 MTUxODU4WhcNMTkwNjMwMjM1OTU5WjBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2Zl cjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1bmhvZmVy IFJvb3QgQ0EgMjAwNzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMM9HslljVuIN/c+ wSG2VN6wOlcbGhzumAh0AVpvtd82VytERc7zRhNldpWYVMeohRVuEqQX6AvhIacxPSnd/6PWT9K0 if1jStqrU+9ZBbRP4jsqkZnAy2VXgaMwk5AOyb39FTIyCKRIfFYF8rs2ieJIwm9LkgwlRb6tPtTH Ae2xyBK0MAhup29/eiCnu7TlNYBULBmP2UvAHatD+GEUlPuwHV23kexiwJHRXt2nC7MtH2Y5GDyu BBTl0n022bLNpxOwzEWdVgRRcTM2XC9dUROeT0iQDpdaS3DbuXnZodaUyJLQpftgvy2tnnEAF4bA /UhmnRRMBU5M0XFEC9B6D7ECAwEAAaOB2TCB1jAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQxw3kbuvVT1xfgiXotF2wK syudMzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFC9FQh4xBYDVcNj4HVfLW3rVPZz3MBIGA1Ud EwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQEwcAYDVR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3BraS50ZWxlc2VjLmRlL2Nn aS1iaW4vc2VydmljZS9hZl9Eb3dubG9hZEFSTC5jcmw/LWNybF9mb3JtYXQ9WF81MDkmLWlzc3Vl cj1EVF9ST09UX0NBXzIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBABq3THo85d3CY7LehiVORWJM9PKPX13X 5Y3ODtf1lOGLkzE2p5oj52fhUsFaGNaZ4YBkOA9KNTNdZnoo3Dh/N3LNUnVuEI5sfYz3Ket3wrkZ BdS3PWG66AUS1FBiU+8iVGL8TQHDXtQNg3RpUdU8nqzbpCt8bYSW03FNz9UtcaOSxD9Vz5s9I3cH V+nIzh2XtjP7kZdglg/39t5vJZASqxlH1UQjrsGSNSi/KkNeD+oHXdJE0IWC4xK8R+osrfjwQVJ9 Nroin3qgMu9LvPk6B7Ypxn04XzVVfjjyP3yz7i1uIXhfuRPP795lgMgl9WYtVEqtztkuDjDPgDOn ixly6kEwggTGMIIDrqADAgECAgphHTMZAAAAAAADMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGcxCzAJBgNVBAYT AkRFMRMwEQYDVQQKEwpGcmF1bmhvZmVyMSEwHwYDVQQLExhGcmF1bmhvZmVyIENvcnBvcmF0ZSBQ S0kxIDAeBgNVBAMTF0ZyYXVuaG9mZXIgUm9vdCBDQSAyMDA3MB4XDTA3MTIxMjE0NDkzNVoXDTE5 MDYzMDIzNTk1OVowZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsT GEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIw MDcwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDCdBBRy3XRgfErNZ1agjqvkq7NAvyu yPsgdw7/aBIVkEmnZ3xoJF/6DiYaZT5KngkK04dPMxGKa1WiS02lT1Yb48d4efijC95VRmSH2owP PU6JYS8JPppdvVW6leZy4Ta0sHWctee2+nQruSX38b6TucFwp/eWf0y8i3XrsYFR7PzJ4XM75gWw UUvjsPVKCp/j2b8mJlBHTh4PHAOTxhWkT/avPKu9+FZ5SPluPsuwaDecLbqla6lm26TkNrB2KPa4 r92/seVnbDK1YnihgKUP3Tb4Aeb7rgHIUZ7ADWR4KQIjwsz+/0BWGKpNrp3XMRF8D4KO9qInwd7k Gd8Rzlf3AgMBAAGjggFyMIIBbjASBgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRPHa+Iym24 qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUL0VCHjEFgNVw2PgdV8tb etU9nPcwdQYDVR0fBG4wbDBqoGigZoYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS9maGct cm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNybIYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1j YS0yMDA3LmNybDCBkAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYMwgYAwPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBr aS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy1yb290LWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8v Y2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF AAOCAQEAAHdsjDP57lcEJcrLiDnmTkykzsKWSxmGTbhEV8KVqRA37DBVMV/1nrW7tWtaoXfseksl 2OFdQs3BQzhhd8AO28iFf+ncgudyPZbmU48vc41LIy2bnA+I3jY2t0BLt/bELGLLhNzE3xRSYK/z XgBTB1ZJBxsd5VV2/hdyd/vcXlx5P8Af8iCnf0SIjDE0+Pmvq2tjEwrGAHuJICdL89k12BjfLbo4 woLFFG8HyQvcKzogiTDSTNYu7FFalSiKLMFu4eUKVlDbtROEQLAxM+3XqVwmGgCMD6axCJK9HROt 86h4ZjOHoEu4hpgXzUKIVDuoyTljXCfXSManNHP+FlB4PDCCBagwggSQoAMCAQICCjQb63gAAAAA uucwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAf BgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2Vy IENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYwMTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTET MBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxMERktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYD VQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxsgT9VRl hiEraBMqzI0g5nkPrSTp7j5TS/GTjKhiwmyr4hZ6VuurgDhTMulz7JRLZJMXJqEwjEBqPiHoGTEk gHl166P/lx2Or+j9XiHPYPxJjDOvRkWsrw+SWuiyacbroSTaDwz7nA38R27jXUSEKyi0SmhXYiBU Ihh1/sEf/uDmi9oBhfj6gOjzM/vLM7NJqi70CE6UMa0Ph8R7H+rwYXhQlVWZzUnKvt6OJFJ4HLJv m6xHreiOrU97kPlwi3YQZUxC439gYPY0wmFEmddNHOQ2fjtkoQYR9IgGWfP3vbQ8nXxUTIlOhS5x 9sSaSU/pTYBJv7xYyjPrS9SIGl5bqQIDAQABo4ICYTCCAl0wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgbAMCsGA1Ud EQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQBfgSrsBku X2mKj92DUbzW0i0r8zAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+Iym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBs MGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3Js hjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYI KwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVy LXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2Vy LWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGct dXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1wa2kuZGUvMBMGA1UdJQQMMAoGCCsGAQUFBwME MEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYBBAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAOayOZLk0fQfhQ7I0Qzn6KzuD4ixrzteS XITHu1RJ9/3xebplEm6YI/jwMLNFnfglXq+9I+rGjE/PxSOW6qK8CA31DIo8qXhsxvvfF3yrFzHL zgyCcWdoxer2YvfKpJJfx0BKPGMvuAeTJp5L+PuWcGkvmDb/wRwAJOfjNSokNdc27k3T+HTtXNsM rQzGWeIZFnK+pSQm/gWoDX7dNZE592/Dq8Rp83jedwl5CDBKd0B6PDCM7vsEA9P+9L9/142H/1u6 gYVNlR7GhsjCjUtsvpDZrMPNAd2wVAPoqiJ0WrfG/IEuA5SySue+aeflbvMxDT1cWFnighiatWYb xwNmPDCCBbQwggScoAMCAQICCjQb6OgAAAAAuuYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMC REUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBL STEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYw MTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxME RktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYDVQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAosulW1xdX1xuHoX36m/A69SfDwvfsXmrYgI0qhSDgovRnWxT 64dxCK2+vU+LskPno1m0RJTRbKgVo6O8j1/oU/OBVpi82DM97mWMUxYEpweKLdq+ROTZPUwFY8Qf z8EJ/cZjyrEBYs8NxAfRPFRWGd+BrkKNIvB9mr77PQa/rA+qEuNTmKY0Nbl4VAgwmGV37RFA2CLz 38wc44uloJJKyYIA7CbIMae3kjUKy9YY55kyjgCY3c21/YV4ruOEwBu9yfEBmxx0E1P0/fB7G3+7 d6kBL+avP/QhwYmdJjFsarYSmUpXp9P1+c8HFTw5TYGULtj8f/FWQlmRjWDzSct4eQIDAQABo4IC bTCCAmkwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgQwMCsGA1UdEQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRir/+EBYAUW6PBp6sYHmuGX1+fsjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+I ym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBsMGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhv ZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JshjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0 dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUF BzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7 BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5k ZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1w a2kuZGUvMB8GA1UdJQQYMBYGCisGAQQBgjcKAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYB BAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkq hkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEABPYI1Hbqips/0o+2m6Guww7ys/5F++qSYPq6w4CtlyuPupLZdKzEVuZ2 n1fopZuEndTyCTq8DUJwZXKPEIYKQGhkbFNy3IDaHB5VHaX0JsqV4DsgD6Xa2jnEBQpiy8RxMKP5 mY5NRS4jO6J+bFjrMiKbjDlzvJJxy6kqy8efjxH6RdMjGxQRcMS4EUTs7DRu38A81XEGaqqtjcwN 3n3EvJUVcBzXn63Bmb4bgv1U6DYXFMSMcksssapmsdL0EPXKAWBRcswouetjRBXIFfu1xKFINtwy ax6RCZycAEXddFC6j/3BVvi6iNFSE1VVQx+HQz1EhGBcp80W3qnIvoO1UjGCA3YwggNyAgEBMHUw ZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIg Q29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb63gAAAAA uucwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAdYwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUx DxcNMTEwMTA0MTIyNDQ2WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUDYNKrkm+cWNVx/KSMpQCHhl7OZgwZwYJ KoZIhvcNAQkPMVowWDAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0DAgICAIAwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICAUAw BwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwBwYFKw4DAhowCgYIKoZIhvcNAgUwgYQGCSsGAQQBgjcQ BDF3MHUwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVu aG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb 6OgAAAAAuuYwgYYGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMXegdTBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJh dW5ob2ZlcjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1 bmhvZmVyIFVzZXIgQ0EgMjAwNwIKNBvo6AAAAAC65jANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQAuxqrkTnlz X7GR8On9dWz+8Wn8EJSzAw5/f99pK3ykxT6ZId3gR2E06HoGsDXgLo3EcE9dfWXnfB4kvYHDPzQd OD9QIZ+cGNxa1MvuJEE5I6bkfIGTCcxPNEdB302+CBExyWhDcb5qyK2+beqz3Jrd8Eu/18hdBTxX 2rXfEvF7+EsJd/dvIQnY6sA923kPleWCaen/x3hzonp0X0dwbhR0Sg3Ct0C/5Ntsot3jbY7zUzQT h5fAAJlAndCKr1ubAFhapInp32cXIM82n1WtEHHgaBRoZ1hPd4t7SzWsJwj/WYBGtu7rsOGXaig0 x+UQIZQ948Lk/3/H19oOSCQjN+3HAAAAAAAA ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01CBAC12.C1403330-- From L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Tue Jan 4 04:34:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7FDC3A6BAC for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:34:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.603, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2jbLWN4PsWpw for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:34:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail78.messagelabs.com (mail78.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217773A6BB2 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:34:28 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-78.messagelabs.com!1294144595!47273236!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.39] Received: (qmail 17780 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2011 12:36:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT012P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.39) by server-9.tower-78.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 4 Jan 2011 12:36:35 -0000 Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.2.9]) by EXHT012P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.39]) with mapi; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:36:35 +0000 From: To: , Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:36:43 +0000 Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAF0g4AAAu/qg Message-ID: References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:34:31 -0000 Link quality values are transmitted and collected across a network in RFC5578 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 and, of course, via SNMP or similar for the MIB information that started th= is thread. If the information is meaningless, why include it in a MIB? -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 12:24 To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLAS= SIFIED) Importance: High 0 to 1 does not have to be represented as a floating point number. A fixed point number is just as valid a representation. The 0 to 100 you ar= e proposing is just such a fixed point number, just you've called the top v= alue 100 rather than 1. As internally all that matters is comparisons there= is no difference, except you've imposed an arbitrary value of 100. When you refer to "the receiver" you seem to be under the misapprehension t= hat the link quality values are transmitted. they are not. In particular they are not included in a HELLO message. They = are defined in NHDP as limited to the router they are used on, so there sho= uldn't be any of the issues you note (possible effort in converting to floa= t - which is not specified in NHDP - aside). (You could collect link quality values across a network. But those would be= meaningless except in comparison with the specified thresholds, and then a= ll that matters is ordering.) -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, = Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] Sent: 04 January 2011 12:12 To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 NHDP's choice of 0 to 1 still has to be represented as a floating point number, so my criticism stands - and holds for OLSR's link quality in section 13 of RFC3626 as well. Yes, it could be represented less accurately as a compromise with integer division (e.g /256, as mentioned earlier.) 0 to 100 makes some sense as an equivalent for avoiding processing/arithmetic overhead at the receiver - and for then avoiding the ambiguity of translating between different representations of 0 to 1, with varying rounding errors introduced by integer division/different floating points etc. -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 11:57 To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Importance: High The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected criticism is also misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in the interval 0 to 1, and it's up to an implementer to decide how precise he needs it. In terms of NHDP itself all that matters is where the value stands relative to two thresholds. However the use of a value that may be more precise than this allows implementers to use the approaches described in RFC 3626 for OLSR, with whatever precision they require. as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 To: ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 Thanks for the context. DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > Lloyd, >=20 > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. >=20 > Ulrich >=20 > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > Lloyd, >=20 > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: >=20 > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be=20 > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? >=20 > thanks, >=20 > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final=20 > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues=20 > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: >=20 > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. >=20 > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality=20 > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our=20 > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to=20 > publication. >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 >=20 > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the=20 > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB=20 > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance=20 > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues=20 > during neighbor discovery. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 Lloyd Wood L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk http://sat-net.com/L.Wood _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de Tue Jan 4 04:43:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C353A6BB2 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:43:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.101 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.155, BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EslGb3CvTcYW for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:43:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (mailguard.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F20943A6BBF for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 04:43:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fgan.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa6GM-00078V-IY; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:45:18 +0100 Received: from mailserv1.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.96.101] helo=mailserv1.lorien.fkie.fgan.de) by mailhost.fgan.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa6GM-00012D-AQ; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:45:18 +0100 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:45:17 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01CBAC15.9E9078B0" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAF0g4AAAu/qgAAAsPCA= References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Rogge Henning" To: , , X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.96.5/12477/Tue Jan 4 11:11:05 2011) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de X-Scan-Signature: da8eb4258d586be99f3c918cac8a614c Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:43:16 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CBAC15.9E9078B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk >=20 > Link quality values are transmitted and collected across a network in > RFC5578 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 > > and, of course, via SNMP or similar for the MIB information=20 > that started this thread. If the information is meaningless,=20 > why include it in a MIB? I think there is a lot of confusion about "link quality" and "link = cost", especially because both of them can (but don't need to) be determined by similar algorithms/protocols (ETX for example). The link quality of NHDP is used as an internal value to trigger the = link hysteresis. Its a way to prevent a link going "on" and "off" very = quickly. It's not designed to be transmitted to other NHDP nodes for processing. The link cost of (the comming) OLSRv2 is a routing metric that is used = to calculate best paths through the mesh network. Yes, you can read the link metric value for remote monitoring, but this = is not part of the NHDP protocol. Reading it through SNMP from a MIB is a = way to learn why a certain link of NHDP is up/down, nothing more. Henning Rogge -- Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20 Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, =A0 Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CBAC15.9E9078B0 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYAzCCA58w ggKHoAMCAQICASYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRz Y2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsTFlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMT GkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBDQSAyMB4XDTk5MDcwOTEyMTEwMFoXDTE5MDcwOTIzNTkw MFowcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsT FlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMTGkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBD QSAyMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAqwujNeCLKRSxFIWvPBDkOW81XUqu 3ephjZVJ9G9koxpgZqSpQCKE2dSl5XiTDmgBrblNXDrO07ioQkDfz6O6gllqkhusHJraCCslJ/lp I0fx4Ossepv1EwLQfjR8wp48AFmr9doM9TI8K6xQ2tbD3oOUyqgMmTIOCEhWW2r72uFYWAFJX3JB PBUGAY5draq4k7TNnuun6GotUjTbOu9cdVHa2/Mx+e5xmDLEVBVEDPmbVe2t3xgIoKOGiknuUwWP GUzV3lh5m9JqHEKrxdWnz2gPluThYZh2YciRfNY+AOKRUIfhnQrmrZfSHcY6fcu82gM01Y5bAfVq B7cWtm5KfwIDAQABo0IwQDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUMcN5G7r1U9cX4Il6LRdsCrMrnTMwDwYDVR0TBAgw BgEB/wIBBTAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAJRkWa05ZOcp6xP+WsOL E1fIBCTwdHfAYONn++mJpoO/loJ8btTDPe+egG67KbSYerE7VOs5F0d+Go4L/B8xWTEEss4X8yzH YjZV4iLYiVW0mEiqZPrWHDbYRHhaWiM6V5f1ejBPrp9qTEsrjqAD4z7gqdTSe9KzqOJyPK2e/4BZ 5JtFtPY7sM05GZgy5eohYZDkMSGONLH3LzVKhRDa54o3Ib5ZY+DyhYgxU9RUFIVwefQuBncndS8f uIr5/sW62Dbkg+znZbe/Y1rzRq+BlDfUQYzWI9Yez/VoG0Rjolq6pzVZoeVwBZsOI1eZlAptujlj KIaS8xiE2PvRzwVWZFcwggQuMIIDFqADAgECAgIBDDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBxMQswCQYDVQQG EwJERTEcMBoGA1UEChMTRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBBRzEfMB0GA1UECxMWVC1UZWxlU2VjIFRy dXN0IENlbnRlcjEjMCEGA1UEAxMaRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBSb290IENBIDIwHhcNMDcxMjA1 MTUxODU4WhcNMTkwNjMwMjM1OTU5WjBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2Zl cjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1bmhvZmVy IFJvb3QgQ0EgMjAwNzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMM9HslljVuIN/c+ wSG2VN6wOlcbGhzumAh0AVpvtd82VytERc7zRhNldpWYVMeohRVuEqQX6AvhIacxPSnd/6PWT9K0 if1jStqrU+9ZBbRP4jsqkZnAy2VXgaMwk5AOyb39FTIyCKRIfFYF8rs2ieJIwm9LkgwlRb6tPtTH Ae2xyBK0MAhup29/eiCnu7TlNYBULBmP2UvAHatD+GEUlPuwHV23kexiwJHRXt2nC7MtH2Y5GDyu BBTl0n022bLNpxOwzEWdVgRRcTM2XC9dUROeT0iQDpdaS3DbuXnZodaUyJLQpftgvy2tnnEAF4bA /UhmnRRMBU5M0XFEC9B6D7ECAwEAAaOB2TCB1jAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQxw3kbuvVT1xfgiXotF2wK syudMzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFC9FQh4xBYDVcNj4HVfLW3rVPZz3MBIGA1Ud EwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQEwcAYDVR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3BraS50ZWxlc2VjLmRlL2Nn aS1iaW4vc2VydmljZS9hZl9Eb3dubG9hZEFSTC5jcmw/LWNybF9mb3JtYXQ9WF81MDkmLWlzc3Vl cj1EVF9ST09UX0NBXzIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBABq3THo85d3CY7LehiVORWJM9PKPX13X 5Y3ODtf1lOGLkzE2p5oj52fhUsFaGNaZ4YBkOA9KNTNdZnoo3Dh/N3LNUnVuEI5sfYz3Ket3wrkZ BdS3PWG66AUS1FBiU+8iVGL8TQHDXtQNg3RpUdU8nqzbpCt8bYSW03FNz9UtcaOSxD9Vz5s9I3cH V+nIzh2XtjP7kZdglg/39t5vJZASqxlH1UQjrsGSNSi/KkNeD+oHXdJE0IWC4xK8R+osrfjwQVJ9 Nroin3qgMu9LvPk6B7Ypxn04XzVVfjjyP3yz7i1uIXhfuRPP795lgMgl9WYtVEqtztkuDjDPgDOn ixly6kEwggTGMIIDrqADAgECAgphHTMZAAAAAAADMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGcxCzAJBgNVBAYT AkRFMRMwEQYDVQQKEwpGcmF1bmhvZmVyMSEwHwYDVQQLExhGcmF1bmhvZmVyIENvcnBvcmF0ZSBQ S0kxIDAeBgNVBAMTF0ZyYXVuaG9mZXIgUm9vdCBDQSAyMDA3MB4XDTA3MTIxMjE0NDkzNVoXDTE5 MDYzMDIzNTk1OVowZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsT GEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIw MDcwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDCdBBRy3XRgfErNZ1agjqvkq7NAvyu yPsgdw7/aBIVkEmnZ3xoJF/6DiYaZT5KngkK04dPMxGKa1WiS02lT1Yb48d4efijC95VRmSH2owP PU6JYS8JPppdvVW6leZy4Ta0sHWctee2+nQruSX38b6TucFwp/eWf0y8i3XrsYFR7PzJ4XM75gWw UUvjsPVKCp/j2b8mJlBHTh4PHAOTxhWkT/avPKu9+FZ5SPluPsuwaDecLbqla6lm26TkNrB2KPa4 r92/seVnbDK1YnihgKUP3Tb4Aeb7rgHIUZ7ADWR4KQIjwsz+/0BWGKpNrp3XMRF8D4KO9qInwd7k Gd8Rzlf3AgMBAAGjggFyMIIBbjASBgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRPHa+Iym24 qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUL0VCHjEFgNVw2PgdV8tb etU9nPcwdQYDVR0fBG4wbDBqoGigZoYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS9maGct cm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNybIYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1j YS0yMDA3LmNybDCBkAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYMwgYAwPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBr aS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy1yb290LWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8v Y2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF AAOCAQEAAHdsjDP57lcEJcrLiDnmTkykzsKWSxmGTbhEV8KVqRA37DBVMV/1nrW7tWtaoXfseksl 2OFdQs3BQzhhd8AO28iFf+ncgudyPZbmU48vc41LIy2bnA+I3jY2t0BLt/bELGLLhNzE3xRSYK/z XgBTB1ZJBxsd5VV2/hdyd/vcXlx5P8Af8iCnf0SIjDE0+Pmvq2tjEwrGAHuJICdL89k12BjfLbo4 woLFFG8HyQvcKzogiTDSTNYu7FFalSiKLMFu4eUKVlDbtROEQLAxM+3XqVwmGgCMD6axCJK9HROt 86h4ZjOHoEu4hpgXzUKIVDuoyTljXCfXSManNHP+FlB4PDCCBagwggSQoAMCAQICCjQb63gAAAAA uucwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAf BgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2Vy IENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYwMTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTET MBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxMERktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYD VQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxsgT9VRl hiEraBMqzI0g5nkPrSTp7j5TS/GTjKhiwmyr4hZ6VuurgDhTMulz7JRLZJMXJqEwjEBqPiHoGTEk gHl166P/lx2Or+j9XiHPYPxJjDOvRkWsrw+SWuiyacbroSTaDwz7nA38R27jXUSEKyi0SmhXYiBU Ihh1/sEf/uDmi9oBhfj6gOjzM/vLM7NJqi70CE6UMa0Ph8R7H+rwYXhQlVWZzUnKvt6OJFJ4HLJv m6xHreiOrU97kPlwi3YQZUxC439gYPY0wmFEmddNHOQ2fjtkoQYR9IgGWfP3vbQ8nXxUTIlOhS5x 9sSaSU/pTYBJv7xYyjPrS9SIGl5bqQIDAQABo4ICYTCCAl0wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgbAMCsGA1Ud EQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQBfgSrsBku X2mKj92DUbzW0i0r8zAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+Iym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBs MGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3Js hjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYI KwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVy LXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2Vy LWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGct dXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1wa2kuZGUvMBMGA1UdJQQMMAoGCCsGAQUFBwME MEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYBBAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAOayOZLk0fQfhQ7I0Qzn6KzuD4ixrzteS XITHu1RJ9/3xebplEm6YI/jwMLNFnfglXq+9I+rGjE/PxSOW6qK8CA31DIo8qXhsxvvfF3yrFzHL zgyCcWdoxer2YvfKpJJfx0BKPGMvuAeTJp5L+PuWcGkvmDb/wRwAJOfjNSokNdc27k3T+HTtXNsM rQzGWeIZFnK+pSQm/gWoDX7dNZE592/Dq8Rp83jedwl5CDBKd0B6PDCM7vsEA9P+9L9/142H/1u6 gYVNlR7GhsjCjUtsvpDZrMPNAd2wVAPoqiJ0WrfG/IEuA5SySue+aeflbvMxDT1cWFnighiatWYb xwNmPDCCBbQwggScoAMCAQICCjQb6OgAAAAAuuYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMC REUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBL STEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYw MTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxME RktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYDVQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAosulW1xdX1xuHoX36m/A69SfDwvfsXmrYgI0qhSDgovRnWxT 64dxCK2+vU+LskPno1m0RJTRbKgVo6O8j1/oU/OBVpi82DM97mWMUxYEpweKLdq+ROTZPUwFY8Qf z8EJ/cZjyrEBYs8NxAfRPFRWGd+BrkKNIvB9mr77PQa/rA+qEuNTmKY0Nbl4VAgwmGV37RFA2CLz 38wc44uloJJKyYIA7CbIMae3kjUKy9YY55kyjgCY3c21/YV4ruOEwBu9yfEBmxx0E1P0/fB7G3+7 d6kBL+avP/QhwYmdJjFsarYSmUpXp9P1+c8HFTw5TYGULtj8f/FWQlmRjWDzSct4eQIDAQABo4IC bTCCAmkwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgQwMCsGA1UdEQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRir/+EBYAUW6PBp6sYHmuGX1+fsjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+I ym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBsMGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhv ZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JshjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0 dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUF BzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7 BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5k ZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1w a2kuZGUvMB8GA1UdJQQYMBYGCisGAQQBgjcKAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYB BAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkq hkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEABPYI1Hbqips/0o+2m6Guww7ys/5F++qSYPq6w4CtlyuPupLZdKzEVuZ2 n1fopZuEndTyCTq8DUJwZXKPEIYKQGhkbFNy3IDaHB5VHaX0JsqV4DsgD6Xa2jnEBQpiy8RxMKP5 mY5NRS4jO6J+bFjrMiKbjDlzvJJxy6kqy8efjxH6RdMjGxQRcMS4EUTs7DRu38A81XEGaqqtjcwN 3n3EvJUVcBzXn63Bmb4bgv1U6DYXFMSMcksssapmsdL0EPXKAWBRcswouetjRBXIFfu1xKFINtwy ax6RCZycAEXddFC6j/3BVvi6iNFSE1VVQx+HQz1EhGBcp80W3qnIvoO1UjGCA3YwggNyAgEBMHUw ZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIg Q29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb63gAAAAA uucwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAdYwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUx DxcNMTEwMTA0MTI0NTE2WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQU1V0PPAlW8mSsjWF8OvsASxsQTZQwZwYJ KoZIhvcNAQkPMVowWDAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0DAgICAIAwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICAUAw BwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwBwYFKw4DAhowCgYIKoZIhvcNAgUwgYQGCSsGAQQBgjcQ BDF3MHUwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVu aG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb 6OgAAAAAuuYwgYYGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMXegdTBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJh dW5ob2ZlcjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1 bmhvZmVyIFVzZXIgQ0EgMjAwNwIKNBvo6AAAAAC65jANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQAS9SLMXD/B HoY8WjLxx6loaWHJ+gj27VigXtB9AIWghxnycCEtmuNa2DWv4l/62S6P6jfFfR9eOOXxYWcJl4sS YBfyewn1UO+lAkEEHto/PRxgSp+cpdtzW4XKbcAtt9mMDUsqOq+tyJc4hQddYJPUjDqC9NDQ3lQX I5Qmmmko3FrYPNEoeD2PklKk67nYemj880uC6ZnbUn8tcrT8xnV5uEUw/4YD65qVuYCGtnIFBFtM ypbIFJN+ipI0xCZBF/ZU6A8du6f0JNRStKy9T2BS3cHiKAcaeLtN3SbSm7yAnaxjI1gEL72ycHmf ivHDz2ZKuqTvedZXbz/d2jt5w/x7AAAAAAAA ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CBAC15.9E9078B0-- From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jan 4 05:09:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C2EC3A6BDE for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:09:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.677, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yS2nt84tT1iZ for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:09:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A15D3A6AE3 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:09:33 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,272,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="107846617" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 13:11:40 +0000 Received: from glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1103.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.194]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p04DBdip013564; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:11:39 GMT Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:11:39 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:11:38 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) thread-index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAF0g4AAAu/qgAAEvo1A= References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2011 13:11:39.0678 (UTC) FILETIME=[EC75ABE0:01CBAC10] Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:09:35 -0000 As has already been noted, DLEP's link quality is not the same as NHDP's link quality. They have different purposes. I think you've gone too far in "meaningless". Locally, but not (in general, but a specific network may differ) globally meaningful. Management may be local. But I didn't write the MIB, so I leave that to those who did. --=20 Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 12:37 To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 Link quality values are transmitted and collected across a network in RFC5578 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 and, of course, via SNMP or similar for the MIB information that started this thread. If the information is meaningless, why include it in a MIB? -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 12:24 To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Importance: High 0 to 1 does not have to be represented as a floating point number. A fixed point number is just as valid a representation. The 0 to 100 you are proposing is just such a fixed point number, just you've called the top value 100 rather than 1. As internally all that matters is comparisons there is no difference, except you've imposed an arbitrary value of 100. When you refer to "the receiver" you seem to be under the misapprehension that the link quality values are transmitted. they are not. In particular they are not included in a HELLO message. They are defined in NHDP as limited to the router they are used on, so there shouldn't be any of the issues you note (possible effort in converting to float - which is not specified in NHDP - aside). (You could collect link quality values across a network. But those would be meaningless except in comparison with the specified thresholds, and then all that matters is ordering.) -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] Sent: 04 January 2011 12:12 To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 NHDP's choice of 0 to 1 still has to be represented as a floating point number, so my criticism stands - and holds for OLSR's link quality in section 13 of RFC3626 as well. Yes, it could be represented less accurately as a compromise with integer division (e.g /256, as mentioned earlier.) 0 to 100 makes some sense as an equivalent for avoiding processing/arithmetic overhead at the receiver - and for then avoiding the ambiguity of translating between different representations of 0 to 1, with varying rounding errors introduced by integer division/different floating points etc. -----Original Message----- From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 11:57 To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Importance: High The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected criticism is also misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in the interval 0 to 1, and it's up to an implementer to decide how precise he needs it. In terms of NHDP itself all that matters is where the value stands relative to two thresholds. However the use of a value that may be more precise than this allows implementers to use the approaches described in RFC 3626 for OLSR, with whatever precision they require. as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. -- Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 To: ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) *** WARNING *** This message has originated outside your organisation, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 Keep this in mind if you answer this message. =20 Thanks for the context. DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction in 32-bit float. What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following it.) On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: > Lloyd, >=20 > I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to also use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on that. >=20 > Ulrich >=20 > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA wrote: > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > Lloyd, >=20 > Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with the > NHDP draft, i.e.: >=20 > "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a > normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, > inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link quality." >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM > To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be=20 > reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in=20 > draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? >=20 > thanks, >=20 > Lloyd Wood > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood > ________________________________________ > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cole, > Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] > Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 > To: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > (UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 > We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final=20 > state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous drafts. > We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues=20 > found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues > remain: >=20 > 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside MIB > experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG reviewers. >=20 > 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality=20 > objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our=20 > draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the > Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to=20 > publication. >=20 > Thanks, > Bob >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of > the IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol > Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt > Pages : 64 > Date : 2011-01-03 >=20 > This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for > use with network management protocols in the Internet community. > In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the=20 > Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB=20 > defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, performance > information and notifications. This additional state and performance=20 > information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues=20 > during neighbor discovery. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > Internet-Draft. > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 Lloyd Wood L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk http://sat-net.com/L.Wood _______________________________________________ manet mailing list manet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From boberry@cisco.com Tue Jan 4 05:10:57 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A19033A6C07 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:10:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FGV2vnRHTRSy for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:10:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A42C83A6BF1 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:10:54 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAG6rIk1AZnwM/2dsb2JhbACkN3OhTJk3hUoEhGiGH4Md X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,272,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="199665060" Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 13:13:01 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (ggsg-vpn1-230-1.cisco.com [10.81.230.1]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p04DD1dn007182; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:13:01 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Bo Berry In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 08:13:01 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> To: "Rogge Henning" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com, manet@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:10:57 -0000 To help clarify the confusion, RFC5578 defines radio link metrics=20 that can be used by the routing protocols to compute a link cost.=20 The equation used to compute the link cost from the metrics is routing protocol dependent.=20 -Bo On Jan 4, 2011, at 7:45 AM, Rogge Henning wrote: >> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk >>=20 >> Link quality values are transmitted and collected across a network in >> RFC5578 >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 >>=20 >> and, of course, via SNMP or similar for the MIB information=20 >> that started this thread. If the information is meaningless,=20 >> why include it in a MIB? >=20 > I think there is a lot of confusion about "link quality" and "link = cost", > especially because both of them can (but don't need to) be determined = by > similar algorithms/protocols (ETX for example). >=20 > The link quality of NHDP is used as an internal value to trigger the = link > hysteresis. Its a way to prevent a link going "on" and "off" very = quickly. > It's not designed to be transmitted to other NHDP nodes for = processing. >=20 > The link cost of (the comming) OLSRv2 is a routing metric that is used = to > calculate best paths through the mesh network. >=20 > Yes, you can read the link metric value for remote monitoring, but = this is > not part of the NHDP protocol. Reading it through SNMP from a MIB is a = way > to learn why a certain link of NHDP is up/down, nothing more. >=20 > Henning Rogge >=20 > -- > Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 > Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 > Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20= > Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 > mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de > GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ---- boberry@cisco.com This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole = use of the intended recipient. This email may contain information that = is protected by NDA. Any unauthorized review, use, distribution or = disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended = recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact = the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jan 4 05:13:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1E73A6BDE for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:13:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.118 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.481, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U2N+1QCV-YTd for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:13:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA80D3A6AE3 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:13:00 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,272,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="107847763" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 13:15:07 +0000 Received: from glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1103.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.194]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p04DF7BW016168; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:15:07 GMT Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:15:06 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 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, 4 Jan 2011 13:15:04 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) thread-index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAF0g4AAAu/qgAAAsPCAAAS5UkA== References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: "Rogge Henning" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2011 13:15:06.0943 (UTC) FILETIME=[67FFCCF0:01CBAC11] Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:13:02 -0000 I would nit-pick what Henning wrote slightly. The hysteresis is there to stop link quality flapping the link on and off. But that leaves the question why have the link quality at all? One answer to that is that it is extremely useful when, for example, running NHDP over IEEE 802.11 to solve the "grey zone" problem (difference between broadcast and unicast data rates and ranges). --=20 Christopher Dearlove Technology Leader, Communications Group Communications and Networks Capability BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 -----Original Message----- From: Rogge Henning [mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de]=20 Sent: 04 January 2011 12:45 To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk; Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: AW: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLAS= SIFIED) > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk >=20 > Link quality values are transmitted and collected across a network in > RFC5578 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 > > and, of course, via SNMP or similar for the MIB information=20 > that started this thread. If the information is meaningless,=20 > why include it in a MIB? I think there is a lot of confusion about "link quality" and "link cost", especially because both of them can (but don't need to) be determined by similar algorithms/protocols (ETX for example). The link quality of NHDP is used as an internal value to trigger the link hysteresis. Its a way to prevent a link going "on" and "off" very quickly. It's not designed to be transmitted to other NHDP nodes for processing. The link cost of (the comming) OLSRv2 is a routing metric that is used to calculate best paths through the mesh network. Yes, you can read the link metric value for remote monitoring, but this is not part of the NHDP protocol. Reading it through SNMP from a MIB is a way to learn why a certain link of NHDP is up/down, nothing more. Henning Rogge -- Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20 Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, =A0 Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From boberry@cisco.com Tue Jan 4 05:13:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2887E3A6C18 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:13:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.516 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.083, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G1vhsoEdoYgw for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:13:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280803A6C0D for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:13:40 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAF+sIk1AZnwM/2dsb2JhbACkN3OhT5k3hUoEhGiGH4Md X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,272,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="199424714" Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 13:15:46 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (ggsg-vpn1-230-1.cisco.com [10.81.230.1]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p04DFkhq008834; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:15:46 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Bo Berry In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 08:15:46 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <84EEF826-68BA-414C-9AF8-B51D9FAFA8B4@cisco.com> References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> <6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> To: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: manet@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:13:42 -0000 note, DLEP followed the RFC 5578 link metric model. -Bo On Jan 4, 2011, at 8:11 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote: > As has already been noted, DLEP's link quality is not the > same as NHDP's link quality. They have different purposes. >=20 > I think you've gone too far in "meaningless". Locally, but > not (in general, but a specific network may differ) globally > meaningful. Management may be local. >=20 > But I didn't write the MIB, so I leave that to those who did. >=20 > --=20 > Christopher Dearlove > Technology Leader, Communications Group > Communications and Networks Capability > BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre > West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK > Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 >=20 > BAE Systems (Operations) Limited > Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, > Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK > Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk]=20 > Sent: 04 January 2011 12:37 > To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 >=20 > *** WARNING *** >=20 > This message has originated outside your organisation, > either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 > Keep this in mind if you answer this message. >=20 >=20 > Link quality values are transmitted and collected across a network in > RFC5578 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 >=20 > and, of course, via SNMP or similar for the MIB information that = started > this thread. If the information is meaningless, why include it in a = MIB? >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) = [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 > Sent: 04 January 2011 12:24 > To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > Importance: High >=20 > 0 to 1 does not have to be represented as a floating point number. > A fixed point number is just as valid a representation. The 0 to 100 = you > are proposing is just such a fixed point number, just you've called = the > top value 100 rather than 1. As internally all that matters is > comparisons there is no difference, except you've imposed an arbitrary > value of 100. >=20 > When you refer to "the receiver" you seem to be under the > misapprehension that the link quality values are transmitted. > they are not. In particular they are not included in a HELLO message. > They are defined in NHDP as limited to the router they are used on, so > there shouldn't be any of the issues you note (possible effort in > converting to float - which is not specified in NHDP - aside). >=20 > (You could collect link quality values across a network. But those = would > be meaningless except in comparison with the specified thresholds, and > then all that matters is ordering.) >=20 > -- > Christopher Dearlove > Technology Leader, Communications Group > Communications and Networks Capability > BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre > West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK > Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 >=20 > BAE Systems (Operations) Limited > Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace > Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales > No: 1996687 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] > Sent: 04 January 2011 12:12 > To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 >=20 > *** WARNING *** >=20 > This message has originated outside your organisation, > either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 > Keep this in mind if you answer this message. >=20 >=20 > NHDP's choice of 0 to 1 still has to be represented as a floating = point > number, so my criticism stands - and holds for OLSR's link quality in > section 13 of RFC3626 as well. >=20 > Yes, it could be represented less accurately as a compromise with > integer division (e.g /256, as mentioned earlier.) >=20 > 0 to 100 makes some sense as an equivalent for avoiding > processing/arithmetic overhead at the receiver - and for then avoiding > the ambiguity of translating between different representations of 0 to > 1, with varying rounding errors introduced by integer = division/different > floating points etc. >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK) = [mailto:Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com]=20 > Sent: 04 January 2011 11:57 > To: Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng); ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) > Importance: High >=20 > The use of a 32 bit float is not in NHDP, so your redirected criticism > is also misplaced. NHDP just specifies a value in the interval 0 to 1, > and it's up to an implementer to decide how precise he needs it. In > terms of NHDP itself all that matters is where the value stands = relative > to two thresholds. > However the use of a value that may be more precise than this allows > implementers to use the approaches described in RFC 3626 for OLSR, = with > whatever precision they require. >=20 > as to what is appropriate to a MIB, I am uncertain. >=20 > -- > Christopher Dearlove > Technology Leader, Communications Group > Communications and Networks Capability > BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre > West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK > Tel: +44 1245 242194 Fax: +44 1245 242124 >=20 > BAE Systems (Operations) Limited > Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace > Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK Registered in England & Wales > No: 1996687 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > Sent: 03 January 2011 18:51 > To: ulrich@herberg.name > Cc: manet@ietf.org; L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >=20 >=20 > *** WARNING *** >=20 > This message has originated outside your organisation, > either from an external partner or the Global Internet.=20 > Keep this in mind if you answer this message. >=20 >=20 > Thanks for the context. >=20 > DLEP representing the quality metric as a percentage 1-100 is actually > pretty sensible, as that's just a single-byte char or integer, and > requires less processing power than representing 0.0-1.0 as a fraction > in 32-bit float. >=20 > What does introducing the increased complexity of a floating-point > number actually give as a benefit? Do you really need third or better > decimal place? (This is a criticism of NHDP, not the MIB following = it.) >=20 > On 3 Jan 2011, at 15:15, Ulrich Herberg wrote: >=20 >> Lloyd, >>=20 >> I agree with Bob. NHDP has been accepted for publication, so we will > not change that. Maybe it might be worth changing the DLEP draft to = also > use values between 0.0 and 1.0, but I don't have a strong opinion on > that. >>=20 >> Ulrich >>=20 >> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA > wrote: >> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED >> Caveats: NONE >>=20 >> Lloyd, >>=20 >> Sorry, but they are not meant to reconcile with=20 >> draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00, instead there are meant to reconcile with > the >> NHDP draft, i.e.: >>=20 >> "Link quality information is defined in this specification as a >> normalized, dimensionless, value in the interval zero to one, >> inclusive, where the greater the value, the better the link > quality." >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Bob >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk [mailto:L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk] >> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 9:37 AM >> To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA; manet@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [manet] FW: I-D >> Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) >>=20 >> How are the link quality metrics in float32 format here meant to be=20= >> reconciled with the percentage link quality metrics in=20 >> draft-ietf-manet-dlep-00 ? >>=20 >> thanks, >>=20 >> Lloyd Wood >> http://sat-net.com/L.Wood >> ________________________________________ >> From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [manet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Cole, >> Robert G Dr CIV USA [Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil] >> Sent: 03 January 2011 14:26 >> To: manet@ietf.org >> Subject: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >> (UNCLASSIFIED) >>=20 >> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED >> Caveats: NONE >>=20 >> We have updated the NHDP-MIB draft. It is now in a reasonably final=20= >> state. We have addressed the outstanding issues from previous = drafts. >> We have completed the Notifications Group and cleaned up the issues=20= >> found by running through 'smilint' (for the most part). Two issues >> remain: >>=20 >> 1) this draft needs a thorough review by the WG and by some outside > MIB >> experts. We'll work with the AD to get some outside the WG = reviewers. >>=20 >> 2) We have chosen to use a new TC called Float32 for the link quality=20= >> objects. Float32 is currently in draft form. We cannot finalize our=20= >> draft until the Float32 draft is published. We have been told by the >> Float32 authors and the ADs that this draft will move quickly to=20 >> publication. >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Bob >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: manet-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:manet-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf >=20 >> Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:15 AM >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Cc: manet@ietf.org >> Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group > of >> the IETF. >>=20 >>=20 >> Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the >> Neighborhood Discovery Protocol >> Author(s) : U. Herberg, et al. >> Filename : draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >> Pages : 64 >> Date : 2011-01-03 >>=20 >> This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) > for >> use with network management protocols in the Internet community. >> In particular, it describes objects for configuring parameters of the=20= >> Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) process on a router. The MIB=20= >> defined in this memo, denoted NHDP-MIB, also reports state, > performance >> information and notifications. This additional state and performance=20= >> information is useful to troubleshoot problems and performance issues=20= >> during neighbor discovery. >>=20 >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 >> Internet-Draft. >> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED >> Caveats: NONE >>=20 >>=20 >> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED >> Caveats: NONE >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> manet mailing list >> manet@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >>=20 >=20 > Lloyd Wood > L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk > http://sat-net.com/L.Wood >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 >=20 > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet ---- boberry@cisco.com This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole = use of the intended recipient. This email may contain information that = is protected by NDA. Any unauthorized review, use, distribution or = disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended = recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact = the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. From henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de Tue Jan 4 05:21:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80C933A6C0A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:21:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.197, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FJT36IyAKtVw for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:21:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 259D63A6C06 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:21:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fgan.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa6rK-0002gp-It; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:23:30 +0100 Received: from mailserv1.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.96.101] helo=mailserv1.lorien.fkie.fgan.de) by mailhost.fgan.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa6rK-0001Bd-AT; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:23:30 +0100 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 14:23:29 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01CBAC1A.F4C43E60" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcurdzmGOpd3zGJWTZuuPMlg+O7wBgAjioqQAABw8lAAAF0g4AAAu/qgAAAsPCAAAS5UkAAALIog References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> From: "Rogge Henning" To: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" , , X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.96.5/12477/Tue Jan 4 11:11:05 2011) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de X-Scan-Signature: 797bbac53b4539d3de9d70869dd0fccf Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:21:27 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CBAC1A.F4C43E60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)=20 >=20 > I would nit-pick what Henning wrote slightly. The hysteresis=20 > is there to stop link quality flapping the link on and off. > But that leaves the question why have the link quality at all? Hysteresis is there to stop link flapping... it can be implemented by = using a "link quality value". (I don't think I said it's to prevent the link quality value from = flapping) > One answer to that is that it is extremely useful when, for=20 > example, running NHDP over IEEE 802.11 to solve the "grey zone" > problem (difference between broadcast and unicast data rates=20 > and ranges). Yes, it can also be used for preventing "too bad" links from being considered "up", thats right. Either way, link quality and link cost are similar concepts, just used = for different things. Most input that can be used for a good link quality estimation (and a good link hysteresis) could be used for calculating a = link cost for routing too. You could even use a multiplicative dijkstra = directly on the link quality values for routing. Henning Rogge -- Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20 Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, =A0 Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CBAC1A.F4C43E60 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYAzCCA58w ggKHoAMCAQICASYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRz Y2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsTFlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMT GkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBDQSAyMB4XDTk5MDcwOTEyMTEwMFoXDTE5MDcwOTIzNTkw MFowcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsT FlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMTGkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBD QSAyMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAqwujNeCLKRSxFIWvPBDkOW81XUqu 3ephjZVJ9G9koxpgZqSpQCKE2dSl5XiTDmgBrblNXDrO07ioQkDfz6O6gllqkhusHJraCCslJ/lp I0fx4Ossepv1EwLQfjR8wp48AFmr9doM9TI8K6xQ2tbD3oOUyqgMmTIOCEhWW2r72uFYWAFJX3JB PBUGAY5draq4k7TNnuun6GotUjTbOu9cdVHa2/Mx+e5xmDLEVBVEDPmbVe2t3xgIoKOGiknuUwWP GUzV3lh5m9JqHEKrxdWnz2gPluThYZh2YciRfNY+AOKRUIfhnQrmrZfSHcY6fcu82gM01Y5bAfVq B7cWtm5KfwIDAQABo0IwQDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUMcN5G7r1U9cX4Il6LRdsCrMrnTMwDwYDVR0TBAgw BgEB/wIBBTAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAJRkWa05ZOcp6xP+WsOL E1fIBCTwdHfAYONn++mJpoO/loJ8btTDPe+egG67KbSYerE7VOs5F0d+Go4L/B8xWTEEss4X8yzH YjZV4iLYiVW0mEiqZPrWHDbYRHhaWiM6V5f1ejBPrp9qTEsrjqAD4z7gqdTSe9KzqOJyPK2e/4BZ 5JtFtPY7sM05GZgy5eohYZDkMSGONLH3LzVKhRDa54o3Ib5ZY+DyhYgxU9RUFIVwefQuBncndS8f uIr5/sW62Dbkg+znZbe/Y1rzRq+BlDfUQYzWI9Yez/VoG0Rjolq6pzVZoeVwBZsOI1eZlAptujlj KIaS8xiE2PvRzwVWZFcwggQuMIIDFqADAgECAgIBDDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBxMQswCQYDVQQG EwJERTEcMBoGA1UEChMTRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBBRzEfMB0GA1UECxMWVC1UZWxlU2VjIFRy dXN0IENlbnRlcjEjMCEGA1UEAxMaRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBSb290IENBIDIwHhcNMDcxMjA1 MTUxODU4WhcNMTkwNjMwMjM1OTU5WjBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2Zl cjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1bmhvZmVy IFJvb3QgQ0EgMjAwNzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMM9HslljVuIN/c+ wSG2VN6wOlcbGhzumAh0AVpvtd82VytERc7zRhNldpWYVMeohRVuEqQX6AvhIacxPSnd/6PWT9K0 if1jStqrU+9ZBbRP4jsqkZnAy2VXgaMwk5AOyb39FTIyCKRIfFYF8rs2ieJIwm9LkgwlRb6tPtTH Ae2xyBK0MAhup29/eiCnu7TlNYBULBmP2UvAHatD+GEUlPuwHV23kexiwJHRXt2nC7MtH2Y5GDyu BBTl0n022bLNpxOwzEWdVgRRcTM2XC9dUROeT0iQDpdaS3DbuXnZodaUyJLQpftgvy2tnnEAF4bA /UhmnRRMBU5M0XFEC9B6D7ECAwEAAaOB2TCB1jAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQxw3kbuvVT1xfgiXotF2wK syudMzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFC9FQh4xBYDVcNj4HVfLW3rVPZz3MBIGA1Ud EwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQEwcAYDVR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3BraS50ZWxlc2VjLmRlL2Nn aS1iaW4vc2VydmljZS9hZl9Eb3dubG9hZEFSTC5jcmw/LWNybF9mb3JtYXQ9WF81MDkmLWlzc3Vl cj1EVF9ST09UX0NBXzIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBABq3THo85d3CY7LehiVORWJM9PKPX13X 5Y3ODtf1lOGLkzE2p5oj52fhUsFaGNaZ4YBkOA9KNTNdZnoo3Dh/N3LNUnVuEI5sfYz3Ket3wrkZ BdS3PWG66AUS1FBiU+8iVGL8TQHDXtQNg3RpUdU8nqzbpCt8bYSW03FNz9UtcaOSxD9Vz5s9I3cH V+nIzh2XtjP7kZdglg/39t5vJZASqxlH1UQjrsGSNSi/KkNeD+oHXdJE0IWC4xK8R+osrfjwQVJ9 Nroin3qgMu9LvPk6B7Ypxn04XzVVfjjyP3yz7i1uIXhfuRPP795lgMgl9WYtVEqtztkuDjDPgDOn ixly6kEwggTGMIIDrqADAgECAgphHTMZAAAAAAADMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGcxCzAJBgNVBAYT AkRFMRMwEQYDVQQKEwpGcmF1bmhvZmVyMSEwHwYDVQQLExhGcmF1bmhvZmVyIENvcnBvcmF0ZSBQ S0kxIDAeBgNVBAMTF0ZyYXVuaG9mZXIgUm9vdCBDQSAyMDA3MB4XDTA3MTIxMjE0NDkzNVoXDTE5 MDYzMDIzNTk1OVowZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsT GEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIw MDcwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDCdBBRy3XRgfErNZ1agjqvkq7NAvyu yPsgdw7/aBIVkEmnZ3xoJF/6DiYaZT5KngkK04dPMxGKa1WiS02lT1Yb48d4efijC95VRmSH2owP PU6JYS8JPppdvVW6leZy4Ta0sHWctee2+nQruSX38b6TucFwp/eWf0y8i3XrsYFR7PzJ4XM75gWw UUvjsPVKCp/j2b8mJlBHTh4PHAOTxhWkT/avPKu9+FZ5SPluPsuwaDecLbqla6lm26TkNrB2KPa4 r92/seVnbDK1YnihgKUP3Tb4Aeb7rgHIUZ7ADWR4KQIjwsz+/0BWGKpNrp3XMRF8D4KO9qInwd7k Gd8Rzlf3AgMBAAGjggFyMIIBbjASBgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRPHa+Iym24 qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUL0VCHjEFgNVw2PgdV8tb etU9nPcwdQYDVR0fBG4wbDBqoGigZoYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS9maGct cm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNybIYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1j YS0yMDA3LmNybDCBkAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYMwgYAwPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBr aS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy1yb290LWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8v Y2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF AAOCAQEAAHdsjDP57lcEJcrLiDnmTkykzsKWSxmGTbhEV8KVqRA37DBVMV/1nrW7tWtaoXfseksl 2OFdQs3BQzhhd8AO28iFf+ncgudyPZbmU48vc41LIy2bnA+I3jY2t0BLt/bELGLLhNzE3xRSYK/z XgBTB1ZJBxsd5VV2/hdyd/vcXlx5P8Af8iCnf0SIjDE0+Pmvq2tjEwrGAHuJICdL89k12BjfLbo4 woLFFG8HyQvcKzogiTDSTNYu7FFalSiKLMFu4eUKVlDbtROEQLAxM+3XqVwmGgCMD6axCJK9HROt 86h4ZjOHoEu4hpgXzUKIVDuoyTljXCfXSManNHP+FlB4PDCCBagwggSQoAMCAQICCjQb63gAAAAA uucwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAf BgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2Vy IENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYwMTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTET MBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxMERktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYD VQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxsgT9VRl hiEraBMqzI0g5nkPrSTp7j5TS/GTjKhiwmyr4hZ6VuurgDhTMulz7JRLZJMXJqEwjEBqPiHoGTEk gHl166P/lx2Or+j9XiHPYPxJjDOvRkWsrw+SWuiyacbroSTaDwz7nA38R27jXUSEKyi0SmhXYiBU Ihh1/sEf/uDmi9oBhfj6gOjzM/vLM7NJqi70CE6UMa0Ph8R7H+rwYXhQlVWZzUnKvt6OJFJ4HLJv m6xHreiOrU97kPlwi3YQZUxC439gYPY0wmFEmddNHOQ2fjtkoQYR9IgGWfP3vbQ8nXxUTIlOhS5x 9sSaSU/pTYBJv7xYyjPrS9SIGl5bqQIDAQABo4ICYTCCAl0wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgbAMCsGA1Ud EQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQBfgSrsBku X2mKj92DUbzW0i0r8zAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+Iym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBs MGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3Js hjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYI KwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVy LXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2Vy LWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGct dXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1wa2kuZGUvMBMGA1UdJQQMMAoGCCsGAQUFBwME MEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYBBAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAOayOZLk0fQfhQ7I0Qzn6KzuD4ixrzteS XITHu1RJ9/3xebplEm6YI/jwMLNFnfglXq+9I+rGjE/PxSOW6qK8CA31DIo8qXhsxvvfF3yrFzHL zgyCcWdoxer2YvfKpJJfx0BKPGMvuAeTJp5L+PuWcGkvmDb/wRwAJOfjNSokNdc27k3T+HTtXNsM rQzGWeIZFnK+pSQm/gWoDX7dNZE592/Dq8Rp83jedwl5CDBKd0B6PDCM7vsEA9P+9L9/142H/1u6 gYVNlR7GhsjCjUtsvpDZrMPNAd2wVAPoqiJ0WrfG/IEuA5SySue+aeflbvMxDT1cWFnighiatWYb xwNmPDCCBbQwggScoAMCAQICCjQb6OgAAAAAuuYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMC REUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBL STEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYw MTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxME RktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYDVQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAosulW1xdX1xuHoX36m/A69SfDwvfsXmrYgI0qhSDgovRnWxT 64dxCK2+vU+LskPno1m0RJTRbKgVo6O8j1/oU/OBVpi82DM97mWMUxYEpweKLdq+ROTZPUwFY8Qf z8EJ/cZjyrEBYs8NxAfRPFRWGd+BrkKNIvB9mr77PQa/rA+qEuNTmKY0Nbl4VAgwmGV37RFA2CLz 38wc44uloJJKyYIA7CbIMae3kjUKy9YY55kyjgCY3c21/YV4ruOEwBu9yfEBmxx0E1P0/fB7G3+7 d6kBL+avP/QhwYmdJjFsarYSmUpXp9P1+c8HFTw5TYGULtj8f/FWQlmRjWDzSct4eQIDAQABo4IC bTCCAmkwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgQwMCsGA1UdEQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRir/+EBYAUW6PBp6sYHmuGX1+fsjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+I ym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBsMGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhv ZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JshjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0 dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUF BzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7 BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5k ZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1w a2kuZGUvMB8GA1UdJQQYMBYGCisGAQQBgjcKAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYB BAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkq hkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEABPYI1Hbqips/0o+2m6Guww7ys/5F++qSYPq6w4CtlyuPupLZdKzEVuZ2 n1fopZuEndTyCTq8DUJwZXKPEIYKQGhkbFNy3IDaHB5VHaX0JsqV4DsgD6Xa2jnEBQpiy8RxMKP5 mY5NRS4jO6J+bFjrMiKbjDlzvJJxy6kqy8efjxH6RdMjGxQRcMS4EUTs7DRu38A81XEGaqqtjcwN 3n3EvJUVcBzXn63Bmb4bgv1U6DYXFMSMcksssapmsdL0EPXKAWBRcswouetjRBXIFfu1xKFINtwy ax6RCZycAEXddFC6j/3BVvi6iNFSE1VVQx+HQz1EhGBcp80W3qnIvoO1UjGCA3YwggNyAgEBMHUw ZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIg Q29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb63gAAAAA uucwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAdYwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUx DxcNMTEwMTA0MTMyMzI4WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUiNqtnUC9WmSTHJ7qCwkYjJXvOzEwZwYJ KoZIhvcNAQkPMVowWDAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0DAgICAIAwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICAUAw BwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwBwYFKw4DAhowCgYIKoZIhvcNAgUwgYQGCSsGAQQBgjcQ BDF3MHUwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVu aG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb 6OgAAAAAuuYwgYYGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMXegdTBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJh dW5ob2ZlcjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1 bmhvZmVyIFVzZXIgQ0EgMjAwNwIKNBvo6AAAAAC65jANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQClK9akGG5v wHfO59Jdjo8tLsWc10Y7xl51IWQEVdZoXsIGNcHKkJh35xgxEh9GGwtSu1ndQlP1/3hMzHz02jjr 8fpssJFrkfX6dBcK0BWP3mXn/S3mNIwm4DFj3QR/xp35DL//YtJ0zmVuofmJu1xzHD/0eJcnwfat SqRRyiseQe1tVfzejL5CeY5MW7vq78NeooJd1tj/cOs87Tq7YVirqWVHLOXjfCjyhU+zc5Kxg0pT 5rO6Y9Uq52JuD99/kIkP1qreKEQgjQueO7dPSdvQIsHAiH5hFuv2DKiKCU2rFwtbBUjnI69vFmtw yAJSMU5+BPyRup0T5N29WLdfAfCoAAAAAAAA ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CBAC1A.F4C43E60-- From henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de Tue Jan 4 05:23:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F0EC3A6BFF for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:23:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.898, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y5cT54Wryl64 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:23:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (mailguard.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69FB43A6C0A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:23:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fgan.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa6t9-0002lv-Hs; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:25:23 +0100 Received: from mailserv1.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.96.101] helo=mailserv1.lorien.fkie.fgan.de) by mailhost.fgan.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pa6t9-0001CX-9V; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:25:23 +0100 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 14:25:22 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0014_01CBAC1B.381780F0" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <84EEF826-68BA-414C-9AF8-B51D9FAFA8B4@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) Thread-Index: AcusEZD3uNloEal0QUaofq7WYy4dBgAAQfmw References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> <84EEF826-68BA-414C-9AF8-B51D9FAFA8B4@cisco.com> From: "Rogge Henning" To: "Bo Berry" , "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.96.5/12477/Tue Jan 4 11:11:05 2011) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de X-Scan-Signature: 8a842d9e11f1c1d58316de1cda04e013 Cc: manet@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:23:18 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01CBAC1B.381780F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Bo Berry >=20 > note, DLEP followed the RFC 5578 link metric model. > -Bo Maybe it would be a good idea to choose a better metric range than = 0-100. The value is much too small for a good link quality/cost metric unless = it's always a floating point value. OLSRv2 will have link metric costs from = 0/1 to 2^24-1. Henning Rogge -- Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20 Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, =A0 Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01CBAC1B.381780F0 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYAzCCA58w ggKHoAMCAQICASYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRz Y2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsTFlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMT GkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBDQSAyMB4XDTk5MDcwOTEyMTEwMFoXDTE5MDcwOTIzNTkw MFowcTELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxHDAaBgNVBAoTE0RldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gQUcxHzAdBgNVBAsT FlQtVGVsZVNlYyBUcnVzdCBDZW50ZXIxIzAhBgNVBAMTGkRldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20gUm9vdCBD QSAyMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAqwujNeCLKRSxFIWvPBDkOW81XUqu 3ephjZVJ9G9koxpgZqSpQCKE2dSl5XiTDmgBrblNXDrO07ioQkDfz6O6gllqkhusHJraCCslJ/lp I0fx4Ossepv1EwLQfjR8wp48AFmr9doM9TI8K6xQ2tbD3oOUyqgMmTIOCEhWW2r72uFYWAFJX3JB PBUGAY5draq4k7TNnuun6GotUjTbOu9cdVHa2/Mx+e5xmDLEVBVEDPmbVe2t3xgIoKOGiknuUwWP GUzV3lh5m9JqHEKrxdWnz2gPluThYZh2YciRfNY+AOKRUIfhnQrmrZfSHcY6fcu82gM01Y5bAfVq B7cWtm5KfwIDAQABo0IwQDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUMcN5G7r1U9cX4Il6LRdsCrMrnTMwDwYDVR0TBAgw BgEB/wIBBTAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAJRkWa05ZOcp6xP+WsOL E1fIBCTwdHfAYONn++mJpoO/loJ8btTDPe+egG67KbSYerE7VOs5F0d+Go4L/B8xWTEEss4X8yzH YjZV4iLYiVW0mEiqZPrWHDbYRHhaWiM6V5f1ejBPrp9qTEsrjqAD4z7gqdTSe9KzqOJyPK2e/4BZ 5JtFtPY7sM05GZgy5eohYZDkMSGONLH3LzVKhRDa54o3Ib5ZY+DyhYgxU9RUFIVwefQuBncndS8f uIr5/sW62Dbkg+znZbe/Y1rzRq+BlDfUQYzWI9Yez/VoG0Rjolq6pzVZoeVwBZsOI1eZlAptujlj KIaS8xiE2PvRzwVWZFcwggQuMIIDFqADAgECAgIBDDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBxMQswCQYDVQQG EwJERTEcMBoGA1UEChMTRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBBRzEfMB0GA1UECxMWVC1UZWxlU2VjIFRy dXN0IENlbnRlcjEjMCEGA1UEAxMaRGV1dHNjaGUgVGVsZWtvbSBSb290IENBIDIwHhcNMDcxMjA1 MTUxODU4WhcNMTkwNjMwMjM1OTU5WjBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2Zl cjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1bmhvZmVy IFJvb3QgQ0EgMjAwNzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMM9HslljVuIN/c+ wSG2VN6wOlcbGhzumAh0AVpvtd82VytERc7zRhNldpWYVMeohRVuEqQX6AvhIacxPSnd/6PWT9K0 if1jStqrU+9ZBbRP4jsqkZnAy2VXgaMwk5AOyb39FTIyCKRIfFYF8rs2ieJIwm9LkgwlRb6tPtTH Ae2xyBK0MAhup29/eiCnu7TlNYBULBmP2UvAHatD+GEUlPuwHV23kexiwJHRXt2nC7MtH2Y5GDyu BBTl0n022bLNpxOwzEWdVgRRcTM2XC9dUROeT0iQDpdaS3DbuXnZodaUyJLQpftgvy2tnnEAF4bA /UhmnRRMBU5M0XFEC9B6D7ECAwEAAaOB2TCB1jAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQxw3kbuvVT1xfgiXotF2wK syudMzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFC9FQh4xBYDVcNj4HVfLW3rVPZz3MBIGA1Ud EwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQEwcAYDVR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3BraS50ZWxlc2VjLmRlL2Nn aS1iaW4vc2VydmljZS9hZl9Eb3dubG9hZEFSTC5jcmw/LWNybF9mb3JtYXQ9WF81MDkmLWlzc3Vl cj1EVF9ST09UX0NBXzIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBABq3THo85d3CY7LehiVORWJM9PKPX13X 5Y3ODtf1lOGLkzE2p5oj52fhUsFaGNaZ4YBkOA9KNTNdZnoo3Dh/N3LNUnVuEI5sfYz3Ket3wrkZ BdS3PWG66AUS1FBiU+8iVGL8TQHDXtQNg3RpUdU8nqzbpCt8bYSW03FNz9UtcaOSxD9Vz5s9I3cH V+nIzh2XtjP7kZdglg/39t5vJZASqxlH1UQjrsGSNSi/KkNeD+oHXdJE0IWC4xK8R+osrfjwQVJ9 Nroin3qgMu9LvPk6B7Ypxn04XzVVfjjyP3yz7i1uIXhfuRPP795lgMgl9WYtVEqtztkuDjDPgDOn ixly6kEwggTGMIIDrqADAgECAgphHTMZAAAAAAADMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGcxCzAJBgNVBAYT AkRFMRMwEQYDVQQKEwpGcmF1bmhvZmVyMSEwHwYDVQQLExhGcmF1bmhvZmVyIENvcnBvcmF0ZSBQ S0kxIDAeBgNVBAMTF0ZyYXVuaG9mZXIgUm9vdCBDQSAyMDA3MB4XDTA3MTIxMjE0NDkzNVoXDTE5 MDYzMDIzNTk1OVowZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsT GEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIw MDcwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDCdBBRy3XRgfErNZ1agjqvkq7NAvyu yPsgdw7/aBIVkEmnZ3xoJF/6DiYaZT5KngkK04dPMxGKa1WiS02lT1Yb48d4efijC95VRmSH2owP PU6JYS8JPppdvVW6leZy4Ta0sHWctee2+nQruSX38b6TucFwp/eWf0y8i3XrsYFR7PzJ4XM75gWw UUvjsPVKCp/j2b8mJlBHTh4PHAOTxhWkT/avPKu9+FZ5SPluPsuwaDecLbqla6lm26TkNrB2KPa4 r92/seVnbDK1YnihgKUP3Tb4Aeb7rgHIUZ7ADWR4KQIjwsz+/0BWGKpNrp3XMRF8D4KO9qInwd7k Gd8Rzlf3AgMBAAGjggFyMIIBbjASBgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRPHa+Iym24 qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUL0VCHjEFgNVw2PgdV8tb etU9nPcwdQYDVR0fBG4wbDBqoGigZoYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS9maGct cm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNybIYxaHR0cDovL2NybC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1j YS0yMDA3LmNybDCBkAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYMwgYAwPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBr aS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy1yb290LWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8v Y2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctcm9vdC1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF AAOCAQEAAHdsjDP57lcEJcrLiDnmTkykzsKWSxmGTbhEV8KVqRA37DBVMV/1nrW7tWtaoXfseksl 2OFdQs3BQzhhd8AO28iFf+ncgudyPZbmU48vc41LIy2bnA+I3jY2t0BLt/bELGLLhNzE3xRSYK/z XgBTB1ZJBxsd5VV2/hdyd/vcXlx5P8Af8iCnf0SIjDE0+Pmvq2tjEwrGAHuJICdL89k12BjfLbo4 woLFFG8HyQvcKzogiTDSTNYu7FFalSiKLMFu4eUKVlDbtROEQLAxM+3XqVwmGgCMD6axCJK9HROt 86h4ZjOHoEu4hpgXzUKIVDuoyTljXCfXSManNHP+FlB4PDCCBagwggSQoAMCAQICCjQb63gAAAAA uucwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAf BgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2Vy IENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYwMTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTET MBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxMERktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYD VQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxsgT9VRl hiEraBMqzI0g5nkPrSTp7j5TS/GTjKhiwmyr4hZ6VuurgDhTMulz7JRLZJMXJqEwjEBqPiHoGTEk gHl166P/lx2Or+j9XiHPYPxJjDOvRkWsrw+SWuiyacbroSTaDwz7nA38R27jXUSEKyi0SmhXYiBU Ihh1/sEf/uDmi9oBhfj6gOjzM/vLM7NJqi70CE6UMa0Ph8R7H+rwYXhQlVWZzUnKvt6OJFJ4HLJv m6xHreiOrU97kPlwi3YQZUxC439gYPY0wmFEmddNHOQ2fjtkoQYR9IgGWfP3vbQ8nXxUTIlOhS5x 9sSaSU/pTYBJv7xYyjPrS9SIGl5bqQIDAQABo4ICYTCCAl0wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgbAMCsGA1Ud EQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQBfgSrsBku X2mKj92DUbzW0i0r8zAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+Iym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBs MGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3Js hjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYI KwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUFBzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVy LXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2Vy LWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5kZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGct dXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1wa2kuZGUvMBMGA1UdJQQMMAoGCCsGAQUFBwME MEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYBBAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAOayOZLk0fQfhQ7I0Qzn6KzuD4ixrzteS XITHu1RJ9/3xebplEm6YI/jwMLNFnfglXq+9I+rGjE/PxSOW6qK8CA31DIo8qXhsxvvfF3yrFzHL zgyCcWdoxer2YvfKpJJfx0BKPGMvuAeTJp5L+PuWcGkvmDb/wRwAJOfjNSokNdc27k3T+HTtXNsM rQzGWeIZFnK+pSQm/gWoDX7dNZE592/Dq8Rp83jedwl5CDBKd0B6PDCM7vsEA9P+9L9/142H/1u6 gYVNlR7GhsjCjUtsvpDZrMPNAd2wVAPoqiJ0WrfG/IEuA5SySue+aeflbvMxDT1cWFnighiatWYb xwNmPDCCBbQwggScoAMCAQICCjQb6OgAAAAAuuYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMC REUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBL STEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcwHhcNMTAwMjAxMTE0MDM0WhcNMTYw MTMxMTE0MDM0WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJhdW5ob2ZlcjENMAsGA1UECxME RktJRTEPMA0GA1UECxMGUGVvcGxlMRYwFAYDVQQDEw1IZW5uaW5nIFJvZ2dlMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAosulW1xdX1xuHoX36m/A69SfDwvfsXmrYgI0qhSDgovRnWxT 64dxCK2+vU+LskPno1m0RJTRbKgVo6O8j1/oU/OBVpi82DM97mWMUxYEpweKLdq+ROTZPUwFY8Qf z8EJ/cZjyrEBYs8NxAfRPFRWGd+BrkKNIvB9mr77PQa/rA+qEuNTmKY0Nbl4VAgwmGV37RFA2CLz 38wc44uloJJKyYIA7CbIMae3kjUKy9YY55kyjgCY3c21/YV4ruOEwBu9yfEBmxx0E1P0/fB7G3+7 d6kBL+avP/QhwYmdJjFsarYSmUpXp9P1+c8HFTw5TYGULtj8f/FWQlmRjWDzSct4eQIDAQABo4IC bTCCAmkwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgQwMCsGA1UdEQQkMCKBIGhlbm5pbmcucm9nZ2VAZmtpZS5mcmF1 bmhvZmVyLmRlMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRir/+EBYAUW6PBp6sYHmuGX1+fsjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRPHa+I ym24qhwJ+cXREe1ZtJP6CzB1BgNVHR8EbjBsMGqgaKBmhjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS5mcmF1bmhv ZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JshjFodHRwOi8vY3JsLmZyYXVuaG9mZXItcGtpLmRl L2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY3JsMIIBCgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgf0wgfowPgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGMmh0 dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnBraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcuY2VyMD4GCCsGAQUF BzAChjJodHRwOi8vY2VydC5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLXBraS5kZS9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3LmNlcjA7 BggrBgEFBQcwAYYvaHR0cDovL2ZoZy11c2VyLWNhLTIwMDcub2NzcC5wa2kuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci5k ZS8wOwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGL2h0dHA6Ly9maGctdXNlci1jYS0yMDA3Lm9jc3AuZnJhdW5ob2Zlci1w a2kuZGUvMB8GA1UdJQQYMBYGCisGAQQBgjcKAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMEMEQGA1UdIAQ9MDswOQYLKwYB BAGGClADAQEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3BraS5mcmF1bmhvZmVyLmRlL2NwLzANBgkq hkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEABPYI1Hbqips/0o+2m6Guww7ys/5F++qSYPq6w4CtlyuPupLZdKzEVuZ2 n1fopZuEndTyCTq8DUJwZXKPEIYKQGhkbFNy3IDaHB5VHaX0JsqV4DsgD6Xa2jnEBQpiy8RxMKP5 mY5NRS4jO6J+bFjrMiKbjDlzvJJxy6kqy8efjxH6RdMjGxQRcMS4EUTs7DRu38A81XEGaqqtjcwN 3n3EvJUVcBzXn63Bmb4bgv1U6DYXFMSMcksssapmsdL0EPXKAWBRcswouetjRBXIFfu1xKFINtwy ax6RCZycAEXddFC6j/3BVvi6iNFSE1VVQx+HQz1EhGBcp80W3qnIvoO1UjGCA3YwggNyAgEBMHUw ZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVuaG9mZXIg Q29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb63gAAAAA uucwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAdYwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUx DxcNMTEwMTA0MTMyNTIxWjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQU8FLmbiRdyxiiC5/71vOxRIyCNWswZwYJ KoZIhvcNAQkPMVowWDAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0DAgICAIAwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICAUAw BwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwBwYFKw4DAhowCgYIKoZIhvcNAgUwgYQGCSsGAQQBgjcQ BDF3MHUwZzELMAkGA1UEBhMCREUxEzARBgNVBAoTCkZyYXVuaG9mZXIxITAfBgNVBAsTGEZyYXVu aG9mZXIgQ29ycG9yYXRlIFBLSTEgMB4GA1UEAxMXRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBVc2VyIENBIDIwMDcCCjQb 6OgAAAAAuuYwgYYGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMXegdTBnMQswCQYDVQQGEwJERTETMBEGA1UEChMKRnJh dW5ob2ZlcjEhMB8GA1UECxMYRnJhdW5ob2ZlciBDb3Jwb3JhdGUgUEtJMSAwHgYDVQQDExdGcmF1 bmhvZmVyIFVzZXIgQ0EgMjAwNwIKNBvo6AAAAAC65jANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQC9kDHnNT6N 9AVCtQP/UyhwGAbgKRi9Z8+p4VeIV12SrtvgC9XrFoCs4ds8uQe+gBcbuIVFS8oMwOZefOsx2Kvx b1kwh7s1APLoEUWhtUJ8IiJq4qjnmcLspQgIn5rwCyXavQayC32bcKM+a32wo8o6Vb+zsrybH9Gw cW0dnISpL7Zrmbdylh0Pf1LvHHOPUoFSACtGLj8UY//OiUmsnpefC/p6hKiOyotf8wgtOD3Gnz8b 5Cw6nYIUjzOjdY+VLEbRXIYZ5NSXN02v381ZKK4fpssj1zaJ2ETAozRd5ZUvN9aivz7EzHpVhU64 +BVwzZWE/SQXKVt9o1t3d454/RRCAAAAAAAA ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01CBAC1B.381780F0-- From boberry@cisco.com Tue Jan 4 05:59:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EFF43A6C38 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:59:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.238 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.238 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.361, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9jn7J+HXySBN for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:59:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FE823A6C36 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 05:59:29 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAOq2Ik1AZnwM/2dsb2JhbACkN3OhRpk2hUoEhGiGH4Md X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,272,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="199441931" Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2011 14:01:36 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (ggsg-vpn1-230-1.cisco.com [10.81.230.1]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p04E1ZId026604; Tue, 4 Jan 2011 14:01:35 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Bo Berry In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 09:01:35 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3075AE22-68CB-4132-B97A-290C8CD2B547@cisco.com> References: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4DEA@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AA4E70@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil><6DF7A8A9-9028-4A9D-86D7-D7CA64D18C91@surrey.ac.uk> <84EEF826-68BA-414C-9AF8-B51D9FAFA8B4@cisco.com> To: "Rogge Henning" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: "Dearlove, Christopher \(UK\)" , manet@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk Subject: Re: [manet] FW: I-DAction:draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-mib-07.txt(UNCLASSIFIED) X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:59:31 -0000 The relative link quality (RLQ) metric is there to allow radios to influence the resulting link cost independent of the radio's wave form. We have found this metric (0-100) very useful given=20 the number of different radios & wave forms. RLQ provides an abstraction from the radio. The equations and the heuristics to avoid flapping and flooding is defined/handled beyond the radio link metrics. An example of the link cost equation for OSPFv3 MANET can be found http://sourceforge.net/projects/dleptools/ Look for sim_ospf_config_syntax.readme as an example.=20 Another router-radio protocol defining similalr radio link metrics can be found at the link below. Understand a draft is forth coming.=20 http://sourceforge.net/projects/r2cptools/ For RFC 5578 (RC 4938) http://sourceforge.net/projects/rfc4938/ -Bo On Jan 4, 2011, at 8:25 AM, Rogge Henning wrote: >> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Bo Berry >>=20 >> note, DLEP followed the RFC 5578 link metric model. >> -Bo >=20 > Maybe it would be a good idea to choose a better metric range than = 0-100. > The value is much too small for a good link quality/cost metric unless = it's > always a floating point value. OLSRv2 will have link metric costs from = 0/1 > to 2^24-1. >=20 > Henning Rogge >=20 > -- > Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr=20 > Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE=20 > Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg,=20= > Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685=20 > mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de > GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0=20 ---- boberry@cisco.com This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole = use of the intended recipient. This email may contain information that = is protected by NDA. Any unauthorized review, use, distribution or = disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended = recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact = the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. From georg.wittenburg@gmail.com Wed Jan 12 03:17:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B728F3A6B10 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:17:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IOAAhCDWL-Dr for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:17:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B60643A6B0E for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:17:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so464421bwz.31 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:20:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:subject:date:user-agent:mime-version:x-uid :to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=zsvgGJLIlyQ4OBVO4PJwioDWcb5eiaWidsROHPQhgHY=; b=Xfl5KzsUtdKWAQ/rjCs5RnvratwIrN4Xu1T0zPOAinMEdjN1coW7mQGVShSbTyj/qY yAAEQvEl2b5r/K6CCluNtMcJWtpcittp2G4YL/065H9a8Dx56xBw33k6RPDCCaBsjCB8 wPp9RUf1lL2jyh+TZ97WaufURsfYFXRU+XSq4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:subject:date:user-agent:mime-version:x-uid:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=aCVqeSxgPsBCm7hgQdb1ocq812gWSZ1p+SgmegaWZZRO7/jIuB9VZdLoKzAiT6OE28 QtUTO3oFmA50bhRNDx6TwviX+iqX2oFpjqv7orANw9WIEYrfMhrbWg0W1Os/GlWmTS3f 9pdA5TKWEgex7YbwkyeGrHUquHFRHTsfM3pbQ= Received: by 10.204.123.140 with SMTP id p12mr626689bkr.176.1294831210267; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:20:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from marlin.localnet (sphinx.lix.polytechnique.fr [129.104.11.1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x38sm281513bkj.13.2011.01.12.03.20.08 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:20:09 -0800 (PST) From: Georg Wittenburg Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:19:55 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.37-rc7-686; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-UID: 64 To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201101121219.58614.georg.wittenburg@gmail.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 05:25:56 -0800 Subject: [manet] Review of DYMO Draft X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 11:21:51 -0000 Greetings all, Having reviewed the DYMO specification, I have a couple of comments and=20 questions for clarification, detailed in the below. This is applicable to r= ev.=20 21 of the draft dated July 26, 2010. =2D 3. Terminology The reserved numeric values for unknown Distance (Dist) and Sequence Number= =20 (SeqNum) should be stated somewhere, preferably in this section. One could= =20 probably use zero (0), but it would be helpful to have some explicit statem= ent=20 about this. =2D 4.2.2. Routing Messages (RM) - RREQ & RREP TargetNode.AddTLV.Dist is listed as an optional field, but not used anywher= e in=20 the document =2D 5.3.1. RREQ Creation There should be an explanation why OrigNode.Dist is to be set to a number=20 greater than zero and some advice on which value to use. In fact, I'm somewhat doubtful about the Dist field in general. Sec. 5.2.2= =20 states that when creating or updating a routing table entry "if known, the= =20 Route.Dist is set to the Node.Dist". Node.Dist, in this context, is set by = the=20 sender of the routing message. However, for any non-trivial metric, the=20 distance (i.e., the path metric) should differ depending on the link qualit= y=20 between sender and each of the potentially multiple receivers of a routing= =20 message. Hence, it should be up to each receiver to calculate Dist dependin= g=20 on the link quality (rather than using the sender-specified Node.Dist from = the=20 routing message which would be the same for all receivers). =2D 5.3.1. RREQ Creation The statement "For links that do not support multicast or situations in=20 which unicast messaging is preferred, the IP.DestinationAddress for unicast= =20 RREQ is set to the NextHopAddress." could be more clear about what=20 NextHopAddress (=3D IP address of the respective unicast destination) means= in=20 this context. The same applies to Sec. 5.5.3. "RERR Generation". =2D 5.3.4. RM Handling I found it slightly confusing that the processing of RREQs and RREPs is=20 presented in the same section. Personally, I would have preferred two separ= ate=20 sections for each of them, which the commonalities (i.e., shared code in th= e=20 implementation) in specific sub-section. =2D 5.5.2. Updating Route Lifetimes During Packet Forwarding If the processing of a data packet causes the routing timers to be reset (a= s=20 specified in the draft), then the respective Route.Broken flag should also = be=20 cleared and the Route.Forwarding flag should set. This covers the case in w= hich=20 data packets arrive from a next-hop neighbor for which a route has been fla= gged=20 as broken, but has not yet been removed from the routing table. =46urther, the timers for a routing table entry should be reset when proces= sing=20 both data AND signaling packets (i.e., RREQs and RREPs). Otherwise, existin= g=20 routes along which these packets are forwarded may get deleted before seein= g=20 any data traffic. Note that for RREPs this includes the timers for the rout= ing=20 table entries to both the originator and target node. Similarly, when sending an intermediate RREP (Sec. 5.3.3), the timers for t= he=20 routing table entry of the TargetNode should also be reset. =2D 6. Administratively Configured Parameters and Timer Values The default value of ROUTE_SEQNUM_AGE_MAX_TIMEOUT (60 seconds) may cause=20 low-bandwidth routes to be discarded prematurely. As the tradeoffs are non- obvious, it would be nice to have multiple recommendations for different=20 scenarios. I realize that this may require more real-world experience with = the=20 protocol, but don't really consider this to be a counterargument. Similarly, the value for ROUTE_RREQ_WAIT_TIME (2 seconds) should be more=20 expressive. For instance, AODV (RFC 3561) uses NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME =3D 2 *=20 NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME * NET_DIAMETER =3D 2 * 0.04s * 35 =3D 2.8s. A similarly= =20 detailed definition should be used in this draft. Furthermore, the value sh= ould=20 be large enough to give retries of RREQs a chance to succeed (possibly taki= ng=20 lower TTLs into account, if expanded ring search is employed). =46inally, the statement "The above timing parameter values work well for s= mall=20 and medium well-connected networks with moderate topology changes." is a to= o=20 general to be useful. Once again, exact values for the number of nodes and = the=20 node degree that led to this recommendation would be more helpful. Hope this is helpful, Georg =2D-=20 Dr. Georg Wittenburg Postdoctoral Researcher INRIA / =C9cole Polytechnique, HIPERCOM Team Laboratoire d'Informatique de l'=C9cole Polytechnique (LIX) Route de Saclay, 91128 Palaiseau (CEDEX) Phone: +33-(0)1-69334126, Fax: +33-(0)1-69334044 http://www.lix.polytechnique.fr/hipercom/ From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sun Jan 16 17:15:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839073A6E40; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:15:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.496 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.496 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.103, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PqjAy9ys619c; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:15:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF21A3A6E3F; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:15:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.10 Message-ID: <20110117011501.16624.74747.idtracker@localhost> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:15:01 -0800 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02.txt X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:15:02 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the Manet Simplified Multicast Framework Relay Set Process Author(s) : R. Cole, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02.txt Pages : 54 Date : 2011-01-16 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring aspects of the Simplified Multicast Forwarding (SMF) process for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs). The SMF-MIB also reports state information, performance metrics, and notifications. In addition to configuration, the additional state and performance information is useful to operators troubleshooting multicast forwarding problems. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2011-01-16170235.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From rgcole01@comcast.net Sun Jan 16 17:19:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74DE13A6E40 for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:19:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8LHhVSExoYAv for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:19:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from QMTA11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.59.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491963A6E3F for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:19:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from omta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.28]) by QMTA11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id wRCw1f0050cZkys5BRNXlY; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:22:31 +0000 Received: from [10.0.1.198] ([69.255.128.173]) by omta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id wRNX1f01A3kcSlR3WRNXmX; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:22:31 +0000 From: Robert G Cole To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-79T/ze+OIM6IzFBeEnKa" Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:22:29 -0500 Message-ID: <1295227349.2507.8.camel@chapman> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Subject: [manet] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02] X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:19:59 -0000 --=-79T/ze+OIM6IzFBeEnKa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit We have posted a new version of the SMF-MIB, . Several changes have been made: + Added the Notifications Group and updated the Conformance section + Pulled the RouterPriority object from the MIB, this belongs in a future RSSA specific MIB + Updated the definition of the TEXTUAL CONVENTION for the SmfOpMode + Added the definition of an smfRouterID to help with the identification of the Notification messages. This is defined as one of the addresses of the SMF router + Cleaned up several of the Description clauses within the MIB + Ran the MIB through the smilint checker and fixed the errors and typos Thanks, Bob --=-79T/ze+OIM6IzFBeEnKa Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: Forwarded message - Fw: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: robert.g.cole@us.army.mil Received: from imta20.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (LHLO imta20.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) (76.96.30.23) by sz0139.wc.mail.comcast.net with LMTP; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:06:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ddokavsgwhub001.conus.army.mil ([143.85.192.17]) by imta20.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id wR6U1f00z0Nyn4n0LR6VeQ; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:06:29 +0000 X-CAA-SPAM: 00000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=zUZGhTcKWg5h12aTanMn4eCVgBrTOTLTYLqNlYmm+54= c=1 sm=1 a=ihhYJSUSLxQA:10 a=BLceEmwcHowA:10 a=eFoXwK7G6DzbWDjVxaVI1A==:17 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=lGcAVYM4AAAA:8 a=RBZJNKG-0BfdohDZTokA:9 a=-Tiw4XwHod8ZeD_2rF6FezZbWQkA:4 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=kjO27gckG74A:10 a=2vLtoCrkUDmYPfzmgHAA:7 a=1rmbJyW94w5OocKEEdNnXKT3LOkA:4 a=eFoXwK7G6DzbWDjVxaVI1A==:117 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=us.army.mil; i=Robert.G.Cole@us.army.mil; q=dns/txt; s=conusdkim; t=1295226389; x=1326762389; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:from:to; z=MIME-Version:=201.0|Subject:=20Fw:=20New=20Version=20Not ification=20for=20draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02|Date:=20Sun ,=2016=20Jan=202011=2020:06:27=20-0500|Message-ID:=20<4B8 7393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AF6A1C@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.d s.army.mil>|From:=20"Cole,=20Robert=20G=20Dr=20CIV=20USA" =20|To:=20; bh=Z7N5na3Kbe+tF2xtJzQqt9ZTEhgDwFjePzqmy8ThMl0=; b=NutKSP5a1lFLMh+JSK048FukyrxrnnCaJxaYM41F4gkeEs0nw+D+jTc0 VCIOfDZoEbID+zAfNaPNlerLjPZz8TGwstjdEIwxeKSs2SkHqZLUXU8oa UD/bNAtmW/aLFD1g22OulJEBKllW9SAxWwsoyz7RVpvNNhOreYrQu19N8 A=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,331,1291593600"; d="scan'208,217";a="108947411" Received: from unknown (HELO ddokbh010hub001.nae.ds.army.mil) ([143.82.0.32]) by ddokavsgwhub001.conus.army.mil with ESMTP; 17 Jan 2011 01:06:28 +0000 Received: from DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.15]) by ddokbh010hub001.nae.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:06:28 -0600 Received: from DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil ([143.82.246.39]) by DDCOBH100HUB008.nasw.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:06:28 -0500 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CBB5E2.C4A30EE6" Subject: Fw: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02 Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:06:27 -0500 Message-ID: <4B87393F999699419C0AB9CBF80CA3B6AF6A1C@DDCOBE010HUB006.nae.ds.army.mil> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02 Thread-Index: Acu14pa+2P7ou81QSBSWpCxL2ERZ7wAAC3l6 From: "Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA" To: Return-Path: robert.g.cole@us.army.mil X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jan 2011 01:06:28.0206 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4F8B0E0:01CBB5E2] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBB5E2.C4A30EE6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: IETF I-D Submission Tool To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA Cc: macker@itd.nrl.navy.mil ; adamson@itd.nrl.navy.mil ; harnedy_sean@bah.com Sent: Sun Jan 16 20:02:35 2011 Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02 A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02.txt has been successfully submitted by Robert Cole and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib Revision: 02 Title: Definition of Managed Objects for the Manet Simplified Multicast Framework Relay Set Process Creation_date: 2011-01-16 WG ID: manet Number_of_pages: 54 Abstract: This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring aspects of the Simplified Multicast Forwarding (SMF) process for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs). The SMF-MIB also reports state information, performance metrics, and notifications. In addition to configuration, the additional state and performance information is useful to operators troubleshooting multicast forwarding problems. The IETF Secretariat. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CBB5E2.C4A30EE6 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fw: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02

----- Original Message -----
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool <idsubmission@ietf.org>
To: Cole, Robert G Dr CIV USA
Cc: macker@itd.nrl.navy.mil <macker@itd.nrl.navy.mil>; adamson@itd.nrl.navy.mil <adamson@itd.nrl.navy.mil>; harnedy_sean@bah.com <harnedy_sean@bah.com>
Sent: Sun Jan 16 20:02:35 2011
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02


A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-02.txt has been successfully submitted by Robert Cole and posted to the IETF repository.

Filename:        draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib
Revision:        02
Title:           Definition of Managed Objects for the Manet Simplified Multicast Framework Relay Set Process
Creation_date:   2011-01-16
WG ID:           manet
Number_of_pages: 54

Abstract:
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.
In particular, it describes objects for configuring aspects of the
Simplified Multicast Forwarding (SMF) process for Mobile Ad-Hoc
Networks (MANETs).  The SMF-MIB also reports state information,
performance metrics, and notifications.  In addition to
configuration, the additional state and performance information is
useful to operators troubleshooting multicast forwarding problems.
                                                                                 


The IETF Secretariat.

------_=_NextPart_001_01CBB5E2.C4A30EE6-- --=-79T/ze+OIM6IzFBeEnKa-- From backhaus.robert@googlemail.com Wed Jan 19 01:42:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41FBB3A70D7 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:42:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gG8Wt7iAsABY for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:42:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F51A3A6FB5 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:42:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by iyi42 with SMTP id 42so615649iyi.31 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:45:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=edBvflBCCudOkaCOtHHEaw4+heddkER7bKXX/9Gj+jw=; b=M4W4hfO0wpt2blD7YZdutJ5FmUnaUnzWYz+Df3LH/p1dpKws07BmYPw/9g5MsWOYIg VWwwIUqUmI92olEPA35Hx2368YQeD/nFuJ6CogeG14BWh1e1lzbXIpL35STjsNM6PN1Q yMY3i2D115g58GsE5FnyAvxkE/UAHl9FzNo/U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=M5EdBCdlxJSoHhcEbPhzUtY/MMOe3ObFJsxH1ZF1pIlbILyWtUet3TyZBtH60s20Sg 5Ek8Z6lvaXot0DIS+UJhGNwV56ZQnfMpFVtMJfrs9T/G4GMFqX0gKUcRN/+7ysANBeFw RvQDZEtJwi7xEazxLgu7luis2P5l6bveF9uRI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.32.76 with SMTP id b12mr481491ibd.162.1295430309509; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:45:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.224.21 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:45:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:45:09 +0100 Message-ID: From: Robert Backhaus To: manet@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0022152d6f616df9d3049a2fdfe1 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 08:04:27 -0800 Subject: [manet] Recent DYMO implementation X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:47:51 -0000 --0022152d6f616df9d3049a2fdfe1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello everybody, as a student in computer science at RWTH Aachen, Germany, I am writing my final thesis at the moment. I have been following the IETF MANET working group and came across DYMO routing protocol. During my search for an implementation of DYMO I basically found the ones posted on: http://www.ianchak.com/dymo/ I am interested in taking a closer look at the protocol and understanding it more deeply. As I want to run tests in real environment I am not looking for a simulator version. Do you know of any (non-simulator) implementation that is more recent than DYMOUM and DYMO-AU? Thank you for your help. Best regards, Robert Backhaus --0022152d6f616df9d3049a2fdfe1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello everybody,

as a student in computer= science at RWTH Aachen, Germany, I am writing my final thesis at the mome= nt.
I have been following the IETF MANET working group and came across D= YMO routing protocol.
During my search for an implementation of DYMO I basically found the ones p= osted on: http:/= /www.ianchak.com/dymo/

I am interested in taking a closer look a= t the protocol and understanding it more deeply. As I want to run tests in = real environment I am not looking for a simulator version.
Do you know of any (non-simulator) implementation that is more recent than = DYMOUM and DYMO-AU?

Thank you for your help.

Best regards,
Robert Backhaus



--0022152d6f616df9d3049a2fdfe1-- From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 19 19:45:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF46528C14B; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:45:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.581 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.581 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cDz24-dBwslX; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:45:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4DC428C0F6; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:45:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.10 Message-ID: <20110120034501.9197.64382.idtracker@localhost> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:45:01 -0800 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: [manet] I-D Action:draft-ietf-manet-dymo-mib-04.txt X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 03:45:02 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definition of Managed Objects for the DYMO Manet Routing Protocol Author(s) : S. Harnedy, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-manet-dymo-mib-04.txt Pages : 41 Date : 2011-01-19 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects for configuring aspects of the DYMO routing process. The DYMO-MIB also reports state information, performance information, and notifications. In addition to configuration, this additional state, performance and notification information is useful to management operators troubleshooting DYMO routing problems. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-dymo-mib-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-manet-dymo-mib-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2011-01-19193524.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From teco@inf-net.nl Tue Jan 25 23:43:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55A563A694C for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:43:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.434 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.165, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w0L1Rem1idRK for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:43:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7082C3A6942 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:43:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by wyf23 with SMTP id 23so636507wyf.31 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:46:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.87.131 with SMTP id y3mr5117139wee.3.1296027996605; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:46:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.150] (ip56530916.direct-adsl.nl [86.83.9.22]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r6sm7607979weq.20.2011.01.25.23.46.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:46:35 -0800 (PST) From: Teco Boot Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:46:34 +0100 Message-Id: <34DFE557-13BC-4A83-9BD3-C979AB9F74B7@inf-net.nl> To: manet@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Subject: [manet] NHDP Issues- TTL/HopLimit - GTSM RFC 5082 X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 07:43:40 -0000 While ago, there was discussion on RFC 5082 GTSM for the MANET = protocols. http://www6.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg10213.html Now, it is in DYMO, but not in NHDP/OLSRv2. Because we use same message & packet format, and allow multi-protocol = aggregation, GTSM shall be used for all protocols that use RFC 5444, or leave it out. A protocol may need a multi-hop path. Packets via such a path need GTSM check on reception disabled, of course. What to do? Publish separate document on GTSM for RFC 5444? Teco= From henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de Tue Jan 25 23:54:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 356363A694A for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:54:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.626 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.718, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l-jmseOT8dO4 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:54:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE98428C0CF for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:54:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fgan.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi0FT-0004ME-7j; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:57:03 +0100 Received: from stream.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.5.148] helo=stream.localnet) by mailhost.fgan.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi0FS-0000bq-VJ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:57:03 +0100 From: Henning Rogge To: manet@ietf.org Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:56:53 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-020636-generic; KDE/4.5.1; i686; ; ) References: <34DFE557-13BC-4A83-9BD3-C979AB9F74B7@inf-net.nl> In-Reply-To: <34DFE557-13BC-4A83-9BD3-C979AB9F74B7@inf-net.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart6417728.9RregvkVbV"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201101260856.58698.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.96.5/12572/Wed Jan 26 05:02:00 2011) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de X-Scan-Signature: 9bea0208ff5bf14e461e230ff4736cfe Subject: Re: [manet] NHDP Issues- TTL/HopLimit - GTSM RFC 5082 X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 07:54:06 -0000 --nextPart6417728.9RregvkVbV Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed January 26 2011 08:46:34 Teco Boot wrote: > While ago, there was discussion on RFC 5082 GTSM for the MANET protocols. > http://www6.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg10213.html >=20 > Now, it is in DYMO, but not in NHDP/OLSRv2. > Because we use same message & packet format, and allow multi-protocol > aggregation, GTSM shall be used for all protocols that use RFC 5444, or > leave it out. >=20 > A protocol may need a multi-hop path. Packets via such a path need GTSM > check on reception disabled, of course. >=20 > What to do? Publish separate document on GTSM for RFC 5444? I see no reason to include GTSM directly into any MANET protocol. It can=20 easily be used by any implementation, because it does not change the behavi= our=20 of either DYMO or OLSRv2. You could even implement it outside the manet=20 protocol by a thin layer between the IP stack and the routing protocol. Henning Rogge =2D-=20 Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg, Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0 --nextPart6417728.9RregvkVbV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk0/08UACgkQRIfGfFXsz+Dm/ACcD2F1mLeu6AGrDLZy5dPxA+43 5E4AoKNG/oFcfoY7DMZNYwBLkncjrIck =s495 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart6417728.9RregvkVbV-- From teco@inf-net.nl Wed Jan 26 00:10:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A80B3A6965 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:10:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id As8YVftl6BJg for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:10:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 469BC3A6951 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:10:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by wyf23 with SMTP id 23so654525wyf.31 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:13:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.183.71 with SMTP id cf7mr752789wbb.195.1296029627396; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:13:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.150] (ip56530916.direct-adsl.nl [86.83.9.22]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f35sm10757770wbf.20.2011.01.26.00.13.46 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:13:46 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Teco Boot In-Reply-To: <201101260856.58698.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:13:45 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <61F7996F-F885-49A8-A7A6-2200D0E0C23B@inf-net.nl> References: <34DFE557-13BC-4A83-9BD3-C979AB9F74B7@inf-net.nl> <201101260856.58698.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> To: Henning Rogge X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] NHDP Issues- TTL/HopLimit - GTSM RFC 5082 X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:10:50 -0000 I read your response as follows: - publish a separate document on GTSM for RFC 5444, and take it out of = DYMO. I object against doing nothing. Open issues provide flexibility and=20 incompatibility. The latter is not the goal of defining standards. Teco Op 26 jan 2011, om 08:56 heeft Henning Rogge het volgende geschreven: > On Wed January 26 2011 08:46:34 Teco Boot wrote: >> While ago, there was discussion on RFC 5082 GTSM for the MANET = protocols. >> http://www6.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg10213.html >>=20 >> Now, it is in DYMO, but not in NHDP/OLSRv2. >> Because we use same message & packet format, and allow multi-protocol >> aggregation, GTSM shall be used for all protocols that use RFC 5444, = or >> leave it out. >>=20 >> A protocol may need a multi-hop path. Packets via such a path need = GTSM >> check on reception disabled, of course. >>=20 >> What to do? Publish separate document on GTSM for RFC 5444? > I see no reason to include GTSM directly into any MANET protocol. It = can=20 > easily be used by any implementation, because it does not change the = behaviour=20 > of either DYMO or OLSRv2. You could even implement it outside the = manet=20 > protocol by a thin layer between the IP stack and the routing = protocol. >=20 > Henning Rogge >=20 > --=20 > Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr > Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE > Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) > Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg, Germany > Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685 > mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de > GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0 From henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de Wed Jan 26 01:10:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217AC3A695B for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:10:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.746 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.746 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.598, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OlNqZwMy-zH1 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:10:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de (mailguard.fkie.fraunhofer.de [IPv6:2001:638:401:102:1aa9:5ff:fe5f:7f22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C64FA3A63D2 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:10:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from rufsun5.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.2.5] helo=mailhost.fgan.de) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi1Qx-0002k7-7o; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:12:59 +0100 Received: from stream.fkie.fgan.de ([128.7.5.148] helo=stream.localnet) by mailhost.fgan.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pi1Qw-0000xe-Uq; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:12:59 +0100 From: Henning Rogge To: Teco Boot Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:12:49 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-25-generic; KDE/4.5.1; i686; ; ) References: <34DFE557-13BC-4A83-9BD3-C979AB9F74B7@inf-net.nl> <201101260856.58698.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> <61F7996F-F885-49A8-A7A6-2200D0E0C23B@inf-net.nl> In-Reply-To: <61F7996F-F885-49A8-A7A6-2200D0E0C23B@inf-net.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1732136.LKv784fF6Q"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201101261012.55586.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> X-Virus-Scanned: yes (ClamAV 0.96.5/12572/Wed Jan 26 05:02:00 2011) by a.mx.fkie.fraunhofer.de X-Scan-Signature: 6350b614948b1ffc5b5d2395905c4275 Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] NHDP Issues- TTL/HopLimit - GTSM RFC 5082 X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:10:02 -0000 --nextPart1732136.LKv784fF6Q Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed January 26 2011 09:13:45 Teco Boot wrote: > I read your response as follows: > - publish a separate document on GTSM for RFC 5444, and take it out of > DYMO. I object against doing nothing. Open issues provide flexibility and > incompatibility. The latter is not the goal of defining standards. A separate document how to use GTSM with RFC5444 compatible MANET protocols= =20 and the effects on security and compatibility sounds like a reasonable apro= ach. Henning Rogge =2D-=20 Diplom-Informatiker Henning Rogge , Fraunhofer-Institut f=FCr Kommunikation, Informationsverarbeitung und Ergonomie FKIE Kommunikationssysteme (KOM) Neuenahrer Stra=DFe 20, 53343 Wachtberg, Germany Telefon +49 228 9435-961, Fax +49 228 9435 685 mailto:henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de http://www.fkie.fraunhofer.de GPG: E1C6 0914 490B 3909 D944 F80D 4487 C67C 55EC CFE0 --nextPart1732136.LKv784fF6Q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk0/5ZIACgkQRIfGfFXsz+BcYwCfWd0uiur7wozxn7p206Id0Vpe 730AoKR8DiwgjO0tmBOkUIjSS2Flw/Uz =fqaT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1732136.LKv784fF6Q-- From hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net Wed Jan 26 01:28:22 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE5B03A6975 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:28:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.514 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YN3JRTnYLnVQ for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:28:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A745C3A6964 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:28:20 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 26 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [10.255.139.165]) [192.100.123.77] by mail.gmx.net (mp043) with SMTP; 26 Jan 2011 10:31:19 +0100 X-Authenticated: #29516787 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/F1l9SMizF6v4fhYDtFmiB8u+sGMnC+ebGWkd5Vw K2fjFVt1KOSO2P From: Hannes Tschofenig Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:31:16 +0200 Message-Id: To: manet@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: [manet] Deployment Experience? X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:28:22 -0000 Hi all, some of you might have missed the announcement on the IETF announcement = list. The workshop on "Interconnecting Smart Objects with the Internet" = will take place on the Friday before the IETF#80 meeting in Prague. Here = is the link to the workshop page: http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects There is also a tutorial day attached to the workshop (on Saturday): http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects/tutorial.html I am writing to you because the MANET group has done a lot of work on = routing in constrained environments. The questions I have are:=20 a) Has the deployment experience given you some insight on what = functionality is of common interest for a large range of application = scenarios. A random example of a technology is multicast. b) What is the deployment experience with mobile adhoc networks in = general? Did the technology you guys develop turn out to be useful in = the real world? If not, where did things go wrong or what assumptions = were incorrect? In essence I am asking for sharing your experience with us and whether = there are open questions that still remain to be solved (from a = standardization as well as research point of view). Ciao Hannes= From joseph.macker@nrl.navy.mil Wed Jan 26 12:24:43 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5E73A6860 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 12:24:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fgCO4feod5GK for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 12:24:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.83.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21033A6859 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 12:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.86.3]) by s2.itd.nrl.navy.mil (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id p0QKRYRB014075; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:27:34 -0500 Received: from vpn217206.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.217.206]) by smtp.itd.nrl.navy.mil (SMSSMTP 4.1.16.48) with SMTP id M2011012615273415664 ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:27:34 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Joe Macker In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:27:33 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Hannes Tschofenig X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Deployment Experience? X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:24:44 -0000 For me I think multicast is a key issue.=20 That becomes important at the dynamic edge and there is experience with = early deployments and lessons learned across layers. Working to integrate upper layers simple things such as more flexible = timing apparatus and event driven interfaces can sometimes make a big = difference. For myself, I was hoping to be there but I just had surgery which is = limited my travel options. -Joe On Jan 26, 2011, at 4:31 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > some of you might have missed the announcement on the IETF = announcement list. The workshop on "Interconnecting Smart Objects with = the Internet" will take place on the Friday before the IETF#80 meeting = in Prague. Here is the link to the workshop page: > http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects >=20 > There is also a tutorial day attached to the workshop (on Saturday): > http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects/tutorial.html >=20 > I am writing to you because the MANET group has done a lot of work on = routing in constrained environments. The questions I have are:=20 >=20 > a) Has the deployment experience given you some insight on what = functionality is of common interest for a large range of application = scenarios. A random example of a technology is multicast. >=20 > b) What is the deployment experience with mobile adhoc networks in = general? Did the technology you guys develop turn out to be useful in = the real world? If not, where did things go wrong or what assumptions = were incorrect? >=20 > In essence I am asking for sharing your experience with us and whether = there are open questions that still remain to be solved (from a = standardization as well as research point of view). >=20 > Ciao > Hannes > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet >=20 From budden@nps.edu Wed Jan 26 13:29:36 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: manet@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3272B28C0D7 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:29:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YjsR4AbqIdxr for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:29:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from diamond.nps.edu (diamond.nps.edu [205.155.65.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3BF33A69DF for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:29:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from virginia.nps.edu ([205.155.65.15]) by diamond.nps.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:32:36 -0800 Received: from [172.20.57.6] ([172.20.57.6]) by virginia.nps.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:32:36 -0800 From: Rex Buddenberg To: Joe Macker In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:30:13 -0800 Message-ID: <1296077413.6825.805.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.0 (2.32.0-2.fc14) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jan 2011 21:32:36.0193 (UTC) FILETIME=[8CA06510:01CBBDA0] Cc: manet@ietf.org Subject: Re: [manet] Deployment Experience? X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 21:29:36 -0000 Hannes, I agree with Joe; let me tell you why. If you look at the commercial world and whisper 'mobile', what you get back is all about cellphones and WiFi. 'Mobile' equates to a LAN problem at the fringe of the internet. But that's not the military's problem and it's not emergency services' problem. The topology is different: we want to reach to a router in the ambulance (with all the medical diagnostic sensors attached to a LAN on other side of that router). In other words its a radio-WAN problem, not a LAN one. In addition to topology, there are two other differences here: 10e-4. We can easily provision both the terrestrial-WAN and LANs at Gbit capacities and better. But the radio-WAN tops out in the Mbit territory and we're up on the engineering limits (bits/hertz). About the only remaining engineering rabbit in the hat is multicast. The radio-WAN is the part of the internet where we get the benefit. Shared medium. Most of the internet is made up of point-point infrastructure. This has two edges: point-point means that there's no evident payoff to multicast (part of the reason multicast has had such a slow uptake in the commercial internet to date). And point-point plumbing means that you don't need a MAC. Since a radio-WAN is in the interior of an internet and is four orders of magnitude less capacious than the network segments on all sides, we can safely assume that it will be saturated so we must have a contention-free MAC. My comments about multicast are independent of whether or not there's MANET routing in the infrastructure. On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 15:27 -0500, Joe Macker wrote: > For me I think multicast is a key issue. > That becomes important at the dynamic edge and there is experience with early deployments and lessons learned across layers. > > Working to integrate upper layers simple things such as more flexible timing apparatus and event driven interfaces can sometimes make a big difference. > For myself, I was hoping to be there but I just had surgery which is limited my travel options. > > -Joe > > On Jan 26, 2011, at 4:31 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > some of you might have missed the announcement on the IETF announcement list. The workshop on "Interconnecting Smart Objects with the Internet" will take place on the Friday before the IETF#80 meeting in Prague. Here is the link to the workshop page: > > http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects > > > > There is also a tutorial day attached to the workshop (on Saturday): > > http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects/tutorial.html > > > > I am writing to you because the MANET group has done a lot of work on routing in constrained environments. The questions I have are: > > > > a) Has the deployment experience given you some insight on what functionality is of common interest for a large range of application scenarios. A random example of a technology is multicast. > > > > b) What is the deployment experience with mobile adhoc networks in general? Did the technology you guys develop turn out to be useful in the real world? If not, where did things go wrong or what assumptions were incorrect? > > > > In essence I am asking for sharing your experience with us and whether there are open questions that still remain to be solved (from a standardization as well as research point of view). > > > > Ciao > > Hannes > > _______________________________________________ > > manet mailing list > > manet@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet > > > > _______________________________________________ > manet mailing list > manet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet