I haven’t yet found time to read this (I’m still hoping to before indicated date).
But one thing immediately jumps out. The document references the four Experimental protocols produced by the MANET WG. It references a draft produced for OSPF. From recollection, there were three separate drafts produced for OSPF, all of which became Experimental RFCs. But two are not referred to. But there is also a Proposed Standard MANET routing protocol, OLSRv2, RFC 7181. Its omission is clearly quite wrong. Which indicates a rewriting of Section 2 at least. ( I’m an author of that RFC. But I think it’s pretty objective that it should be there. And I have no connection to the OSPF drafts, and I think it’s pretty objective all or none - and I see no reason why not all - should be there.) There are of course many other protocols; the only other one that I’m aware of and might need mentioning (here I need to read the draft) is NHDP (RFC 6130). This can be viewed as the neighbourhood discovery part of OLSRv2, but is specified as a separate protocol. Some of this paper is about neighbours, and possibly it may be appropriate to reference RFC 6130, but also possibly it might not. (I’m an author of that RFC too.) While posting, but nits, two other things jumped out at me. One is the white space on page 6. The other (since I was looking at references) is the rather odd reference DoD01 with two authors, then a title, then an editor. Of course the RFC Editor would in due course change this to whatever is approved style, but might as well get it closer. And now, looking at my records, I see I have already made (and since forgotten) my main comment (though I didn’t then discuss the OSPF situation) in January, and nothing was done, though there was an indication it should be then. I don’t think this should have proceeded to WGLC with that unaddressed. That trip into records indicated there was a comment then (not from me) about the security considerations section. It’s worth noting that there’s a security framework for OLSRv2, and other protocols to use the manet part/protocol (as specified in RFC 5498) in RFC 7182. -- Christopher Dearlove Senior Principal Engineer BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Laboratories __________________________________________________________________________ T: +44 (0)1245 242194 | E: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> BAE Systems Applied Intelligence, Chelmsford Technology Park, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8HN. www.baesystems.com/ai<http://www.baesystems.com/ai> BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Limited Registered in England & Wales No: 01337451 Registered Office: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Juan Carlos Zuniga Sent: 16 May 2016 17:34 To: [email protected] Subject: [Int-area] WGLC for draft-ietf-intarea-adhoc-wireless-com-01 *** WARNING *** This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external partner or the internet. Consider carefully whether you should click on any links, open any attachments or reply. For information regarding Red Flags that you can look out for in emails you receive, click here<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Red%20Flags.pdf>. If you feel the email is suspicious, please follow this process<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>. Dear Int-Area WG, The draft-ietf-intarea-adhoc-wireless-com has been discussed in several occasions and we believe that the latest version addresses all the comments that have been made. This email starts an Int-Area WG Last Call on: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-adhoc-wireless-com-01 Please respond to this email to support the document and/or send comments by 2016-05-30. In addition, to satisfy RFC 6702 "Promoting Compliance with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)": Are you personally aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-intarea-adhoc-wireless-com? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules? (See RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669, and 5378 for more details.) Best, Juan Carlos Zuniga & Wassim Haddad (Int-Area WG co-chairs) ******************************************************************** 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. ********************************************************************
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
