Subject: [manet] Start of Defining the MANET L2 Technology

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:57:00 +0200

Hi Folks,

I am starting defining MANET technology used, which I see many
interests in and a need for. This need was mentioned in 82-meeting and
in the Discussion Linst. I just wanted to announce *interests* and
that it will be a separate Information track, but if the WG wants it
other we can discuss that.

There was some oppose to the idea of all/any drafts including
definition, so I decided to make a first PUSH to one draft for our
productive discussion and WG progress,

Thanking you

Abdussalam Baryun
University of Glamorgan, UK,
=====================================================

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 10:27:39 +0200

Hi Folks,

As mentioned before some reasons for starting defining a) MANET
use-cases and b) the L2 technologies used by MANET WG or
MANET-protocols. However, I will now try to be explicit, so my
proposal below is in two parts one to mention  the reason of the I-D,
and the other part to mention the I-D content conditions of the draft,

====================  Part One  ==========================

Firstly, in the proposed draft it *will not* discuss IP-Models nor L3
models of MANET [this will be done by I-D authored by Emmanuel, and
Perkins (2012)]. The proposed draft will be focused on L2 technologies
that MAY provide services to upper layer of MANET (i.e. L3 or
above),including productive discussion and research papers. Secondly,
in the proposed draft it *will* define MANET assumptions and
conditions at L2 ,and discussed in the draft document for each L2
MANET protocol. Thirdly, optionally (i.e. we can take out) the
proposed draft MAY mention (i.e. not define but mention as examples) a
possible L1 technology used by such L2 protocol only as input to drive
the reasons of L2-conditions and L2-assumptions but NOT to define L1,
nor to define L1 wireless-conditions of MANET.

=====================   Part  two   ========================

So to be progressing I mention the main reasons of the subject title
also as follows:

1- The presentation concerns of Robert Cole in the MANET WG 82
meeting, with the discussion of Teco and input of Mrs.Sue (mentioning
a paper in MILCOM 07 or 08).

2-  The apearance of DLEP accepted by the MANET WG as a I-D for the
WG, which this DLEP protocol is a Layer 2 (L2) technology serving
routers.

The additional optional reasons that WG may ignore :

1- There MAY be intention of internet-community and users around the
world to use RFC3561 and RFC3626 in some cases, and in addition the
use also of AODVv2 and OLSRv2 in other cases. Specifically, they need
to know the applicability of using such general purpose protocol,
because thoes RFCs may not mentioned the full use-case (they are
general purpose).

2- There are misunderstanding in the community of MANET protocols
use-cases, which MAY cause of; creating new WGs like ROLL and 6LoWPAN,
and closing the Ad-hoc Autoconfig WG. A definition will probably stop
this misunderstanding and stop creating new WGs that separate from
MANET WG and that take L2 technologies but they still use MANET
protocols (e.g. ROLL are using AODV, and OLSR  ideas).

3- I am writing an I-D for DSRv2 which I am already defining the
technologies used by DSRv2,

Please note this thread is in the purpose to get feedback of interests
or objections so that the author of the proposed draft know if he will
continue making effort or he should leave it for the future
need/interest.

Best Regards

Abdussalam Baryun
University of Glamorgan, UK.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++