Hello again Chris,
I forgot to mention the reference DoD01. This is a book chapter by
James Freebersyser and Barry Leiner in a book that I edited. Do you mean
to suggest that I should delete the part of the citation about the
book's editorship? I don't really know how best to format the citation.
Regards,
Charlie P.
On 5/26/2016 9:27 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
