Re: [OSPF] Adoption of "Single Hop MANET Interface" as WG Document

[Richard Ogier]

In my opinion, the hybrid-bcast-and-p2mp draft is a simple and perfect solution to this problem: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-nsheth-ospf-hybrid-bcast-and-p2mp-01.txt This has been discussed and some of us agree with this.  For example, Jeffrey Zhang's post dated 4/11/2011 summarizes some of the arguments. Although both RFC 5820 (OSPF-OR) and RFC 5614 (OSPF-MDR) can be applied to single-hop broadcast networks and thus solve the same problem as the hybrid-bcast-p2mp draft, the hybrid draft is clearly the simplest solution, involving minimal changes to OSPF. If the network is definitely a single-hop network, so that each router is one hop from all other routers, then there is no need for a MANET solution.  Otherwise, we need a MANET solution, which will also handle the special case of a single-hop network if by chance the network is single-hop (and this can be mentioned in the MANET draft). But I would never apply a MANET solution if the network is definitely a single-hop network; I would go with the simpler solution in the hybrid draft.  For this reason, I don't think it makes sense to propose applying an OSPF-MANET extension to the case of a single-hop broadcast network.  But if someone can describe a situation where it makes sense to do this, please do so. Richard Retana, Alvaro wrote: Hi!   Following up on the WG meeting in Prague…   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-retana-ospf-manet-single-hop   A brief poll at the meeting found no objection to this update to rfc 5820.   This e-mail is the formal request for adoption as a WG document.  Just like rfc 5820, the intended status is Experimental.   Thoughts/comments?   Thanks!   Alvaro.   _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf