Subject: [manet] Re: WG Review: Recharter of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (manet)

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:09:14 -0800

Pekka,

> [...]
>> 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 new charter does not list milestones (dates and in which 
> order/priority the work is going to be done), or any current work 
> going on with the listed work items.  I'd like to see these as part of 
> the charter, discussed at this phase of the chartering.

This is how the secretariat's tool works--strips the milestones.
See attached at the end of the msg.

> In particular, I do not believe the WG has yet formulated routing 
> security requirements and issues.  Is the WG only obligated to a) 
> *investigate* these issues, or b) also take them into account in the 
> upcoming specifications (which may be a VERY difficult job).

> Especially if b), it would probably make sense to charter the WG to 
> first do some work on the security requirements before diving into 
> devising a solution.

> There may be other issues which may need investigation first, rather 
> than just security; it's difficult to tell when there isn't a clear 
> sign of the actual milestones and work items.

As with MIBs, WGs are implicitly expected to investigate and address security
issues in their protocols as part of the protocol work. This clearly means that
a consensus will need to exist as to what needs to be secured and to what
extent. I'll leave this up to the WG chairs to decide how exactly this should be
done--through a separate requirements document or not.

Thanks!

Alex

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: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:55:09 +0000

> [all current milestones are DONE]

OK, the current milestone is "Submit DSR specification
to IESG for publication as Experimental RFC." rather
than anything further. But is actually turning DSR into
an Experimental RFC still an intention?

********************************************************************
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.
********************************************************************