The decision to allocate one port was discussed in the MANET group. We
chose to reserve a single port to allow multiple protocols to be used
together. For example, it is extremely likely that NHDP will be used
with both DYMO and OLSRv2.
Before you voiced your suggestion to allocate an IP protocol number,
the issue has never arisen. Unless there is WG support to allocate an
IP protocol number, I do not think it will be allocated.
Regarding packetbb IANA considerations and other MANET WG protocols
additional IANA needs they are addressed in their documents. For
example, see packetbb's IANA section.
Ian
On 8/9/07, Bo Berry <bberry(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
Given that the WG is working to define two standards
- Reactive MANET Protocol (RMP)
- Proactive MANET Protocol (PMP)
that may or may not converge, do we need to allocate
two port numbers so these protocols can co-exist?
There has also been a suggestion to allocate an IP protocol
number for a MANET routing protocol. Should this be
included in this draft?
The various MANET protocols are moving to packetbb which
will require the definition of several/many TLV identifiers.
Where are these type IDs going to be allocated and tracked?
If in the separate protocol drafts, is there a potential
problem with overlap if IDs? If so, perhaps the MANET
type IDs should be defined here.
draft-ietf-manet-packetbb-08 currently reserves IDs
"Message type 0 MUST NOT be allocated because a zero-octet signifies a
packet header and zero-octets are used for padding. Message types 1
to 4 are reserved because they are used by OLSR [4], which uses a
compatible packet/message header format."
Thanks
-Bo
The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks WG
(manet) to consider the following document:
- 'Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Allocations for the
Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANET) Working Group '
<draft-ietf-manet-iana-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2007-08-18. Exceptionally,
comments may be sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case,
please
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-iana-05.txt
IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=15731&rfc_flag=0
_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
manet(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
manet(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf