AB,

As Joel pointed out, your questions should have been raised during the 
OSPF WG Last Call, which you did not participate in. You 
(inappropriately) posted questions on the MANET WG list after the OSPF 
WGLC was complete, and several people responded, most of them stating 
that RFC 5444 is not required for this document:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15403.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15406.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15407.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15408.html

Although I should not be required to respond to your questions at this 
point, I will provide a few additional reasons why RFC 5444 and DLEP are 
not relevant for this document. (These reasons also apply to the 
parallel document draft-ietf-ospf-manet-single-hop-or-02.)

1. This draft does not propose a new interface, it only describes how 
the interface previously specified in RFC 5614 (and RFC 5820 for the 
other draft) can be configured in the special case of a single-hop 
MANET. Therefore, your comments should have been directed to RFC 5614 
(and RFC 5820).

2. RFCs 5614 and 5820 describe MANET extensions to OSPF, and one of the 
goals was to minimize changes to OSPF, so we decided to use OSPF packet 
formats (with minimal changes), rather than MANET packet formats that 
were designed without OSPF in mind. (This point is also made in the last 
message listed above.)

On the other hand, these are experimental documents, so your questions 
about using RFC 5444 and DLEP may be valid for future modifications to 
the proposed MANET extensions of OSPF (both RFCs 5614 and 5820). But 
they are not valid for draft-ietf-ospf-manet-single-hop-mdr or 
draft-ietf-ospf-manet-single-hop-or, not only because these two drafts 
have already completed WG Last Call, but also because they only describe 
how to configure RFCs 5614 and 5820 for the special case of a single-hop 
network.

Richard

On 6/6/13 3:15 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

 > I send my request to the editors including questions but no reply from
 > them to me. The thread [1] raised some issues, which is not mentioned
 > in the I-D. The message [2] was ignored not answered (this is last
 > reminder). The message [3] proposes using RFC5444 into this I-D, or
 > raise the question of why not using MANET packet format within MANET
 > domains (I need an answer).
 >
 > [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15400.html
 > [2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15412.html
 > [3] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15418.html
 >
 > The I-D SHOULD not go forward if it still ignores the IETF community 
questions.
 >
 > Regards
 > AB
 >
 > On 6/5/13, The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> wrote:
 >> The IESG has received a request from the Open Shortest Path First 
IGP WG
 >> (ospf) to consider the following document:
 >> - 'Use of OSPF-MDR in Single-Hop Broadcast Networks'
 >> <draft-ietf-ospf-manet-single-hop-mdr-03.txt> as Experimental RFC
 >>
 >> 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@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-06-19. Exceptionally, comments 
may be
 >> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
 >> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
 >>
 >> Abstract
 >>
 >>
 >> RFC 5614 (OSPF-MDR) extends OSPF to support mobile ad hoc networks
 >> (MANETs) by specifying its operation on the new OSPF interface of type
 >> MANET. This document describes the use of OSPF-MDR in a single-hop
 >> broadcast network, which is a special case of a MANET in which each
 >> router is a (one-hop) neighbor of each other router. Unlike an OSPF
 >> broadcast interface, such an interface can have a different cost
 >> associated with each neighbor. The document includes configuration
 >> recommendations and simplified mechanisms that can be used in 
single-hop
 >> broadcast networks.
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >> The file can be obtained via
 >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-manet-single-hop-mdr/
 >>
 >> IESG discussion can be tracked via
 >> 
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-manet-single-hop-mdr/ballot/ 

 >>
 >>
 >> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.