idnits 2.17.1 draft-ahn-manet-networkcoding-requirement-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document has an IETF Trust Provisions (28 Dec 2009) Section 6.c(i) Publication Limitation clause. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 4 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (December 22, 2015) is 3047 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: 'RFC2119' on line 66 -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '1' ** Downref: Normative reference to an Experimental RFC: RFC 3561 (ref. '2') ** Downref: Normative reference to an Experimental RFC: RFC 4728 (ref. '3') Summary: 5 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 MANET Working Group Sanghyun Ahn 2 Internet Draft University of Seoul 3 Expires: June 13, 2016 December 22, 2015 5 Requirements on Network Coding Support in MANET 6 draft-ahn-manet-networkcoding-requirement-00.txt 8 Status of this Memo 10 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 11 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified, 12 and derivative works of it may not be created, except to format it 13 for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 14 than English. 16 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 17 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 18 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 19 Drafts. 21 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 22 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 23 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 24 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 26 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 29 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 30 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on June 13, 2016. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/ 41 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 42 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 43 and restrictions with respect to this document. 45 Abstract 47 This document describes the requirements on providing the network 48 coding capability in the mobile ad hoc network (MANET). For this, 49 the conditions to be considered in providing the network coding 50 capability in the MANET are listed. 52 Table of Contents 54 1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 3. Requirements on the Provision of Network Coding . . . . . . . 3 57 4. Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 58 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 1. Requirements notation 63 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 64 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 65 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 67 2. Introduction 69 The mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is composed of a number of mobile 70 nodes which can communicate with each other through multiple 71 wireless links without the help of a wired infrastructure. 72 Because a wireless link is more restricted in its capacity than a 73 wired link, the efficient utilization of wireless links is one of 74 the important issues in wireless networs, especially in the MANET. 76 The network coding is one of the mechanisms that can increase 77 wireless network capacity [1]. In order to provide the network 78 coding capability in the MANET, there are many things to be 79 considered. 81 In this draft, we define the requirements on supporting the network 82 coding in the MANET. 84 3. Requirements on the Provision of Network Coding 86 In applying the network coding capability to the MANET, the 87 following considerations have to be accomponied with: 89 - the delay incurred by waiting at nodes to increase the possibility 90 of encodings in a source-to-destination route 91 - the number of encodings and decodings experienced by a packet 92 in a source-to-destination route 93 - the throughput perceived at destinations 94 - the base MANET unicast routing protocol, such as AODV [2] or DSR 95 [3], on which the network coding capability is applied 96 - the degree of changes on the base MANET unicast routing protocol 98 With considering the above-mentioned conditions, the provision of 99 the network coding capability in the MANET SHOULD satisfy the 100 following requirements: 102 - The delay incurred by the network coding capability SHOULD be 103 controlled such that it does not exceed a certain amount 104 - The number of encodings and decodings SHOULD NOT exceed a given 105 threshold 107 - The modifications and/or extensions on the base MANET unicast 108 routing protocol SHOULD NOT hinder the operation of the base MANET 109 unicast routing protocol. 111 4. Other Considerations 113 TBD 115 References 117 [1] S. Katti, D. Katabi, W. Hu, H. Rahul and M. M'edard, "The 118 Importance of Being Opportunistic: Practical Network Coding 119 for Wireless Environments," Annual Allerton Conference on 120 Communication, Control, and Computing, September 2005. 121 [2] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer and S. Das, "Ad hoc On-Demand 122 Distance Vector (AODV) Routing," RFC 3561, July 2003. 123 [3] D. Johnson, Y. Hu and D. Maltz, "The Dynamic Source Routing 124 Protocol," RFC 4728, February 2007. 126 Author's Address 128 Sanghyun Ahn 129 University of Seoul 130 90, Cheonnong-dong, Tongdaemun-gu 131 Seoul 130-743 132 Korea 133 Email: ahn@uos.ac.kr