Subject: [manet] DLEP-03

From: "Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:50:44 -0500

Stan,

I re-read DLEP-03.  Some minor suggestions.

In Section 4:

 The approach of allowing for different contexts for metric data
increases both the flexibility and the complexity of using metric
data. This document details the mechanism whereby the data is
transmitted, however, the specific algorithms (precedence, etc) for
utilizing the dual-context metrics is out of scope and not addressed
by this document.

It would be nice to have a reference to two showing examples of how this would be or is being used.

In section 9:

Comment:  The usefulness of Items such as RESOURCES and RELATIVE QOS is questionable without some consistency between radio vendors and radio models from the same vendor.  It may be that only a cognitive system could decipher this information into usable input or feedback.

Suggestion: Perhaps a sentence indicating that the use of OPTIONAL Data Item means a implementation does not have to send these requests, not that an implementation does not have to implement these OPTIONAL Data Items.

Also, there is some minor inconsistency in section 9 where OPTIONAL TLV are implicitly called out for some Data Items but not others. This probably should be consistent.  For example:

 The Credit Request TLV is an OPTIONAL TLV.

 The Heartbeat Interval/Threshold TLV is an OPTIONAL TLV.

 The Current Data Rate (CDR) TLV is used in Neighbor Up, Neighbor.....

- Will