[aodvv2-discuss] Re: Decision time, folks

  • From: "Ratliff, Stanley" <sratliff@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:45:07 +0000



-----Original Message-----
From: aodvv2-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aodvv2-discuss-
bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charlie Perkins
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 11:13 AM
To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aodvv2-discuss] Re: Decision time, folks

Hello Stan,

I stand corrected. I probably shouldn't have said that -- it's way too early
for
me here.

Interesting. Looking at this issue, as well as the discussion on "Tagging Every
Address", and considering your extensive exposure with building consensus in
standards organizations, I'd have thought there would be a greater reliance on
the old saying "think, then think again, before you hit 'send'". Either I
should stand corrected as well, or perhaps you should reconsider your penchant
for a "Ready, Fire!, Aim" mode of operation...


But I really can't understand why the two points I summarized for Lotte are
not practically conclusive, and there hasn't been any discussion about it in
the
list.

I can't speak for everyone else, only for myself - I haven't discussed it
anymore, because it appears that you are entrenched in your position, and
unwilling to yield. So am I. At this juncture, arguing with the street sign
outside my house would be more productive.


Worse performance? Why do that? Especially for a condition that almost
never arises?


In theory, yes. But my understanding is that the multicast would be used *only
when* the condition arises... but perhaps I've missed something. Or maybe this
is a compromise path. Who knows.

But in any event, there's a "hole" in the connection logic. A recommendation
was made, from a chair of MANET. I've not seen any indication from said chair
along the lines of 'Oh, OK - you're right. It's not really a problem, or one
not worth solving. So, we'll 'compromise', and do it your way." I'd prefer to
address the issue, bring the chair on-board, help to build consensus amongst
the working group participants, and get the spec to WGLC. Otherwise, this is
just another discussion that fires up, and then fizzles out - with no real
conclusion, just one side sufficiently frustrated to feel "What's the use?".
With AODVv2, it is my humble opinion that this mode of "work" (flogging an
issue to exhaustion/frustration, without a real conclusion) is at the root of
our predicament. Instead of more "discussion without resolution", let's just
determine consensus, and act.

Regards,
Stan


Regards,
Charlie P.


On 6/26/2015 8:09 AM, Ratliff, Stanley wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: aodvv2-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aodvv2-discuss-
bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charlie Perkins
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 11:07 AM
To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aodvv2-discuss] Re: Decision time, folks

Hello Lotte,

Did you read my email to Justin about the difference between
multicast and unicast?

To summarize:
- multicast is an *order of magnitude* more expensive than unicast,
even over a single hop with one neighbor
- multicast is NOT reliable over 802.11 and unicast IS reliable (so
RREP is *less
likely* to be received).

I don't understand how you could vote for multicast if you read that.
Is it just that you don't believe me?

I doubt that Stan read it.
Incorrect. I read it. It didn't change my position.

Stan



Regards,
Charlie P.


[snip]

_____________________________________________________
This electronic message and any files transmitted with it contains
information from iDirect, which may be privileged, proprietary
and/or confidential. It is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the original
recipient or the person responsible for delivering the email to the
intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email
in error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or
copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email
in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender.
_____________________________________________________


Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. aodvv2-discuss
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2015