Subject: [manet] MANET WG rechartering and new co-chair

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 11:36:02 -0800

Folks-

 As you all know we're now in the process of rechartering the WG. As part of
 this process we will also be adding Ian Chakeres as the new co-chair replacing
 Scott Corson. After years of service as MANET WG co-chair, Scott decided to
 step down. I'd like to thank Scott for his contributions to the community!

 Included below in this message is the proposed new MANET WG charter that we've
 developed with the WG chairs and that I put on the IESG agenda for next week.
 If you have any comments, please let us know.
 
-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin

Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (manet)

Chair(s):
 Joseph Macker <[email-masked]>
 Ian Chakeres <[email-masked]>

Routing Area Director(s):
 Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
 Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>

Routing Area Advisor:
 Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>

Mailing Lists:
 General Discussion: [email-masked]
 To Subscribe: [email-masked]
 In Body: subscribe manet
 Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/index.html

Description of Working Group:

The purpose of the MANET working group is to standardize IP routing protocol
functionality suitable for wireless routing application within both static
and dynamic topologies with increased dynamics due to node motion or other
factors.

Approaches are intended to be relatively lightweight in nature, suitable for
multiple hardware and wireless environments, and address scenarios where
MANETs are deployed at the edges of an IP infrastructure. Hybrid mesh
infrastructures (e.g., a mixture of fixed and mobile routers) should also be
supported by MANET specifications and management features.

Using mature components from previous work on experimental reactive and
proactive protocols, the WG will develop two Standards track routing
protocol
specifications:

- Reactive MANET Protocol (RMP)
- Proactive MANET Protocol (PMP)

If significant commonality between RMRP and PMRP protocol modules is
observed, the WG may decide to go with a converged approach. Both IPv4 and
IPv6 will be supported. Routing security requirements and issues will also
be addressed.

The MANET WG will also develop a scoped forwarding protocol that can
efficiently flood data packets to all participating MANET nodes. The primary
purpose of this mechanism is a simplified best effort multicast forwarding
function. The use of this protocol is intended to be applied ONLY within
MANET routing areas and the WG effort will be limited to routing layer
design issues.

The MANET WG will pay attention to the OSPF-MANET protocol work within the
OSPF WG and IRTF work that is addressing research topics related to MANET
environments.

Goals and Milestones:

[all current milestones are DONE]

Mar 05  Submit initial ID of RMP for WG review

Mar 05  Submit initial ID of PMP for WG review

Mar 05  Submit inital ID of generalized MANET flooding approach

Jun 05  Revise WG documents and review 

Nov 05  Document initial implementation progress and experience
          Revise documents based upon implementation experience

Feb 06  Submit RMP specification and supporting documentation to IESG for
        publications as Proposed Standard

Feb 06  Submit PMP specification and supporting documentation to IESG for
        publications as Proposed Standard

Feb 06  Submit MANET flooding specification to IESG for publication as 
        Experimental Standard

Mar 06  Review and update milestones

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

---

From: Shubhranshu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:58:21 +0900

Hi,

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alex Zinin" <[email-masked]>
> supported by MANET specifications and management features.

Its good to know that manet WG will address scenarios where MANETs are 
deployed at the edges of IP infrastructure. Does it mean that MANET WG will
specify Internet gateway operation? What is the scope of " address scenarios" 
mentioned here ? Is  MANET WG interested in independent Internet gateway 
related proposals or would like to support this scenario by inserting few lines 
within RMP and PMP specifications  ?

Regards,
Shubhranshu