Subject: Cambridge Ad-Hoc Routing Protocol (ABR)

From: [email-masked] (C. Toh)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 96 20:44 BST

Dear Fellow IETF Folks :

Recently, I was pressurised to release information about my invention 
of a novel routing protocol for ad-hoc mobile networks. 

I am a supporter of the Internet, the IETF, the academic and
industrial research. However, because this technology is being filed
for a patent, I will have to be aware of the amount of information
to be released to the public (basically the time it should be released).

The patent covers a broad spectrum of protection on the concept of 
associativity. Hence, any unauthorised commerical exploitation of this 
concept will be legally dealt with. However, any commerical organisations 
willing to exploit this invention and to put themselves ahead of others 
in producing ad-hoc networking products and computing platforms could 
contact me via E-mail, and NOT posting to this newsgroup.
                           -----------------------------
Due to my current busy schedule, I can only seriously deal with
company negotiations after 1st September.

I apologise for not being able to show up to present my talk at the IETF
Mobile Ad-hoc Networking BOF meeting in Montreal due to lack of funding 
for my trip. I have informed Steve Batsell in advance about my absence.
However, I hope to present at the next BOF.

Below is a summary of my invention and more sources of references will 
be made known at the end of the year.

	===================================================
	Below is a summary of my invention filed for patent.
	===================================================

	ABR - Cambridge Ad-Hoc Routing Protocol (C-K Toh)
	-------------------------------------------------

			17th July 1996

The ABR, ( sorry  not `available bit rate'  as in ATM but it stands
for Associativity-Based Routing, also known now as Cambridge Ad-Hoc
Routing Protocol) is a new, simple and bandwidth-efficient distributed 
routing protocol for ad-hoc mobile networks. We have identified * new *
routing metrics for ad-hoc mobile networks.

Unlike the conventional distributed routing algorithms, this protocol 
does not attempt to consistently maintain routing information in every 
nodes. In  an  ad-hoc  mobile network where mobile hosts are acting as 
routers and where routes are made inconsistent by mobile hosts' movement, 
we  employ  a  new  associativity-based routing scheme where a route is 
selected  based on nodes having associativity states that imply periods 
of stability. 

In this manner, the routes selected are likely to be long-lived and hence 
there  is  no  need to restart frequently, resulting in higher attainable 
throughput. The association property  also  allows  the  integration  of 
ad-hoc routing into a BS-oriented Wireless LAN environment, providing the 
fault tolerance in times of base stations (BSs) failures. 

The protocol is robust, free from loops, deadlock and packet duplicates 
and has scalable memory requirements. Simulation results obtained reveal 
that shorter and better routes can be discovered quickly during route 
re-constructions.  The  protocol  is  meant  to  support  ad-hoc  mobile 
communications and networking, and has the features to support some form 
of Quality of Service. 

The protocol also has a scheme where enhancements in  throughput can be 
made in a manner that is independent of the underlying MAC layer protocols.
A data acknowledgment and retransmission scheme exists for the ABR. 

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

C-K Toh, Ph.D. (Cambridge)
Founder, Mobile Special Interest Group; 
Cambridge University Computer Laboratory, United Kingdom.

---

From: Dave Johnson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 96 16:11:52 -0400

>contact me via E-mail, and NOT posting to this newsgroup.

I feel strongly that this kind of commercial advertisement (yes, that's
what it is) is inappropriate on any IETF mailing list.  If you want to
solicit commercial investors in your patent, please do it elsewhere.

In addition, the description of your protocol that you included at
the end of your message doesn't reall say much about your protocol.
In particular, a number of the properties you claim for your protocol
are already present in Scott Corson's work, in Charlie Perkins's new
protocol, and in my protocol, all of which we presented in Montreal.
Rather than comparing yourself to "conventional distributed routing
algorithms", what new does your protocol offer over these existing
protocols designed for routing in ad hoc networks?

					Dave