2.5.5 Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (manet)

In addition to this official charter maintained by the IETF Secretariat, there is additional information about this working group on the Web at:

       Additional MANET Page

Last Modified: 2003-06-18

Joseph Macker <macker@itd.nrl.navy.mil>
Scott Corson <corson@flarion.com>
Routing Area Director(s):
Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>
Routing Area Advisor:
Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: manet@ietf.org
To Subscribe: manet-request@ietf.org
In Body: subscribe manet
Archive: www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/manet/current/maillist.html
Description of Working Group:
The purpose of this working group is to standardize IP routing
protocol functionality suitable for wireless routing application
within both static and dynamic topologies. The fundamental design
issues are that the wireless link interfaces have some unique routing
interface characteristics and that node topologies within a wireless
routing region may experience increased dynamics, due to motion or
other factors.

In the past, this WG has focused on exploring a broad range of MANET
problems, performance issues, and related candidate protocols. Under
this revised charter, the WG will operate under a reduced scope by
targeting the promotion of a number of core routing protocol
specifications to EXPERIMENTAL RFC status (i.e., AODV, DSR, OLSR and
TBRPF). Some maturity of understanding and implementation exists with
each of these protocols, yet more operational experimentation
experience is seen as desirable. Overall, these protocols provide a
basic set of MANET capabilities covering both reactive and proactive
design spaces.

With this experimental protocol base established, the WG will move on
to design and develop MANET common group engineered routing
specification(s) and introduce these to the Internet Standards track.
Lessons learned from existing proposals will provide useful design
input, but the target for this effort is a common group engineering
effort not a recompilation of an existing approaches.

As part of this effort, the WG will address the aspects of security
and congestion control in the designed routing protocol(s).

This working group will work closely with the Internet Research Task
Force (IRTF) groups on Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (RRG) for tracking and
considering any mature developments from the related research
Goals and Milestones:
Done  Post as an informational Internet-Drafts a discussion of mobile ad-hoc networking and issues.
Done  Agenda bashing, discussion of charter and of mobile ad hoc networking draft.
Done  Discuss proposed protocols and issues. Redefine charter.
Done  Publish Informational RFC on manet design considerations
Done  Review the WG Charter and update
Done  Submit AODV specification to IESG for publication as Experimental RFC
Done  Develop I-D for potential common manet encapsulation protocol approach
Done  Submit initial I-D(s) of candidate proposed routing protocols and design frameworks
Done  Promote implementation, revision, and testing of initial proposed I-D(s)
Done  Explore basic performance and implementation issues of initial approaches
Done  Explore proposed proactive protocol design commonalities
Done  Submit DSR specification to IESG for publication as Experimental RFC
Done  Submit OLSR specification to IESG for publication as Experimental RFC
Done  Submit TBRPF specification to IESG for publication as Experimental RFC
Jul 03  Develop a further focused problem statement and address an approach for a common engineering work effort
Nov 03  Reevaluate the WG's potential based on the problem statement consensus
  • - draft-ietf-manet-dsr-09.txt
  • - draft-ietf-manet-olsr-11.txt
  • - draft-ietf-manet-tbrpf-10.txt
  • Request For Comments:
    Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET): Routing Protocol Performance Issues and Evaluation Considerations (RFC 2501) (28912 bytes)
    Ad Hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing (RFC 3561) (90356 bytes)

    Current Meeting Report

    split.57th IETF MANET Working Group Minutes
    16 July 2003
    Minutes Taken by: Scott Corson
    Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (manet) Agenda 
    Wednesday, July 16 , 1530-1730
    1. Agenda Bashing
    2. Announcements and IESG Review Updates
    Working Document Progress Updates
    3. AODV Update
    4. DSR Update
    5. OLSR Update
    6. TBRPF Update
    7. Discussion of MANET Related Autoconfiguration Issues
    SUMMARY MINUTES (See Slides for Details)
    The MANET WG met on Wed, July 16th 15:30-17:30 in Vienna.  
    The meeting began with the traditional agenda bashing session and was then 
    followed by updates of the status of the four core WG protocols being 
    considered for EXPERIMENTAL RFC Status: 
    - Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) 
    - Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)
    - Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR)
    - Topology Dissemination Based on Reverse-Path Forwarding (TBRPF)
    J. Macker announced that AODV has cleared IESG review and the RFC editor and 
    is now RFC 3651.  
    C. Perkins then gave a brief overview of the protocol status and related 
    implementation status.  
    D. Johnson gave a more detailed overview for DSR, discussing at length the 
    changes between versions 08 and 09 of the draft.  (See 
    presentation) A. Zinin mentioned that DSR is still in the queue 
    awaiting initial IESG review.
    T. Clausen followed with a similar overview of OLSR (See 
    presentation).  A. Zinin announced that OLSR had essentially completed IESG 
    R. Ogier gave and overview of the latest TBRPF issues and status (See 
    presentation).  There are a few pending issues with TBRPF still to be 
    resolved under IESG review.  Some IANA considerations are also being 
    resolved and the authors have provided an updated version of the 
    specification to cover those issues.
    The presentations and discussions of core protocol efforts and IESG 
    review was followed by a general discussion on whether or not MANET 
    auto-configuration should be taken up as a WG work item.  There were 
    related presentations on auto-configuration and DNS resolution that 
    provided some discussion fodder for this subject as well.  There seems to be 
    strong support for further discussing and working related issues within the 
    WG but no present general agreement on the approaches.  J. Macker has 
    suggested that before such a decision is taken, an Informational RFC 
    describing the nature and scope of the problem should be attempted.  If 
    such a problem statement could be agreed upon then further 
    consideration could be given to the adoption of this work item and 
    subsequent consideration of specific solutions for specific subcases of the 
    problem. This would also help in discussions dealing with where this work 
    should reside or what additional IETF considerations are merited.  There 
    seemed to be agreement on this course of action. 


    DSR Draft Status
    The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol v11
    TBRPF Update
    Ad Hoc IP Address Autoconfiguration