Charlie,
And how long is this supposed to take? Will it impact getting to WGLC on
AODVv2? Will AODVv2 now *require* this brand-new, protocol-independent
registry?
This looks suspiciously like a rat-hole to me. Remember what I said in Buenos
Aires? "It's April. I don't want to be doing this in May. And if it gets to
June, it won't be our decision."
We're losing focus here. I know you hate the notion of a 32-bit metric that
represents hop count. However, I now call for consensus amongst the editing
team - I believe the implementation of a 32-bit metric for AODVv2 is the best
way to go. I want to hear opinions from my co-editors.
Regards,
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: aodvv2-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aodvv2-discuss-
bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charlie Perkins
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 1:45 PM
To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aodvv2-discuss] Metric type registry
Hello folks,
The situation is not yet clear. I am asking various people and getting some
unexpected answers. I will craft a registry for protocol-independent Metric
Types. I did not find one for OLSR or OLSRv2, but if there is one please let
me
know. One way or another we will have an answer within a day or two,
perhaps awaiting a better answer.
I'll be honest. I am more than surprised about this. Routing uses metrics.
Where are they? It's amazing.
More later.
Regards,
Charlie P.
