[aodvv2-discuss] Re: New revision draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2-06c
- From: Lotte Steenbrink <lotte.steenbrink@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 19:01:30 +0100
Tiny followup:
I had totally forgotten that Charlie uses Windows, so i just added the diff
html on the packet_sketch branch. (To look at it, run git fetch to get all
branches and git checkout packet_sketch to change to my branch. The file should
be in the root directory) I'll keep it updated as I go along.
Cheers,
Lotte
Am 25.12.2014 um 16:06 schrieb Lotte Steenbrink <lotte.steenbrink@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Charlie and all,
>
> Am 24.12.2014 um 18:57 schrieb Charlie Perkins
> <charles.perkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>>
>> Hello Lotte and all,
>>
>> I've put a new intermediate revision on Github. I'd like to
>> publish it to the IETF directories with your approval.
>>
>> It includes extensive changes from "node" terminology
>> to "address" terminology wherever appropriate, and gets
>> rid of the "Ndx" terminology in favor of the lists that
>> include null elements.
>
> I'm still not convinced by the list terminology, to be honest. (For the
> record: I'm not convinced by using Ndx either, because it refers to 5444
> packet internals that shouldn't be dictated or described in detail by AODVv2,
> in my opinion. I hope my RFC5444 suggestions are able to reflect how I think
> the language should be... More on that below.)
>
> Also, I've fixed some typos, as you can see in
> https://github.com/Lotterleben/AODVv2-Draft/commit/f1fcc1902b90733faf0270af853c2f9a0f691b9a
> . I hope I didn't fix anything that wasn't broken...
>
> And a few newbie questions:
> * I've noticed the text you added to the Sequence Number (SeqNum) part of the
> Terminology section. If I understood it right, the terminology section is
> meant to be a quick reference, but shouldn't really contain instructions for
> the implementor, which is why I would have looked for the information in the
> text you added in 6.4. Sequence Numbers. Am I missing something here?
>
> * in section 6.6, you added the following text:
> Let "Cost(R)", where 'R' is the route for which the Cost is to be evaluated;
> the route table entry for R includes the information about the metric type
> for R.
> ... Maybe it's just me, but I can't quite figure out what that sentence
> means.
>
>>
>> Lotte, if you have text for the purpose of improving the
>> description for supplying protocol elements to RFC 5444
>> (e.g., OrigAddr with OrigSeqnum, etc.) please let me
>> know. I am willing to help finish it once I get the basic
>> idea of what you want to do. It would be nice to put this
>> into the above-mentioned revision.
>>
>
> As I said in our hangout, I'd like to run my changes by the MANET Mailing
> List before adding them to the draft.
>
> Anyway, I wrote a little script that lets you run rfcdiff over branches,
> showing how *one* file differs on two branches. It's in the root directory of
> your git, and if you run
>
> ./aodvdiff.sh master packet_sketch txt/draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2-05.txt
>
> You will get the rfcdiff html output showing all my changes. (I'm rubbish at
> bash scripting, so I'm sure the script could be improved greatly, but it
> should do the trick)
> What I've done up until now was:
> * added a sketch of a RREQ as I thought it might be useful to the appendix
> * added subsections describing existing addresses and TLVs (The text would
> have to be smoothed out a lot, but the idea should be clear, hopefully)
> * moved some text around
> Next up is going through sections 7 and up and adjusting them to my changes.
>
> Additionally, I was thinking if we could solve our quibbles with the
> “Interface-ness” of RFC5444 with an additional draft that describes
> guidelines on how to build a RFC5444 packet/message builder that is optimized
> to AODVv2's needs? This way, we can keep the description of AODVv2 RFC5444
> packets as generic as possible in the AODVv2 document, but still provide
> packets optimized for AODVv2 to everyone that needs them.)
>
> Cheers,
> Lotte
>
>> It would be nice to do this as a Christmas present to [manet].
>>
>> Regards,
>> Charlie P.
>
Other related posts:
