Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 15, 2016, at 3:50 PM, Lotte Steenbrink <lotte.steenbrink@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi all,
since we've been firmly asked to be more transparent with the MANET list, I
was wondering if we should send a little update e-mail (or even publish a new
version), and how we want to proceed solving the remaining open issues.
Looking at https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg18384.html ;
and the follow-ups), the current open questions seem to be:
* [Use of msg-hop-limit and msg-hop-count: done]
* 7182 and security: to be solved. Does anyone have a suggestion on how to
tackle this one? Do we maybe know somebody who can help us add the required
analysis in a structured manner?
* 10. Terminology and elsewhere - address: we've said:
“AODVv2: We ask for clarification on this issue. We use the phrase “routable
and unicast” in the draft with respect to OrigAddr and TargAddr. We dont mean
to exclude addresses from the private address ranges. But we dont want to
request routes for multicast, indeterminate, link-local, or loopback
addresses. This is not about router interface addresses which are used for
AODVv2.”
And, iirc, we didn't get an answer yet. Does this one deserve its own
discussion thread on the MANET list? ;)
* [19. interfaces list - use of “SHOULD” : this, and the use of
"maybe-normative language", is done now too, right?]
* [IANA Considerations confusion: done]
Did I miss any? What do you think?
Regards, Lotte
