Subject: RE: [manet] Dumb Question?

From: "Mullen, John P. (Contractor)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:18:26 -0600

Hi Zygmunt,

Well, I hadn't gotten that far yet, but certainly some sort of adaptive
protocol would be in order.  Thanks for the links.  I will check it out.

Of course, I should mention that one characteristic of military MANETs is
that it is highly probable that someone will be trying to break your system.
For this reason, military commanders are skeptical of fully automatic
systems.  A system that is fully automated is also fully predictable to
anyone who knows the protocols and is susceptible to a focused attack.  On
the other hand, one that is at least partially under human control is more
difficult to disable.  The problem is, of course, training the human to
manage that level of control, making the necessary information available to
the decision maker, and instilling the discipline to make appropriate
selections under the immediate threats of war.  

Of course, with all the hackers about, this may become a problem for all
MANETs.

:-)

John Mullen

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 12:56 PM
To: Mullen, John P. (Contractor)
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [manet] Dumb Question?

Hi John,

> I just started reading _Ad Hoc Networking_, edited by Charles Perkins.  In
> "A DoD Perspective on Mobile Ad Hoc Networks," James Freebersyser
speculates
> on p. 33 that it is unlikely a single protocol will be able to operate
> efficiently over the full range of conditions under which a military MANET
> must operate.  If he is correct, the issue may never be fully resolved.

Yes, I read this book too (:-) ...

I hate to bring this point over again ... and self-promote our work ... 
but the issue of "efficient operation over a wide range of conditions" can
and should be addressed by a *hybrid* routing scheme, where the "proactive" 
and "reactive" behavior are "mixed" in the amounts that match these
operational conditions. In other words, *adaptivity* is the key issue
here.

One such an example of a hybrid scheme is (of course, you have guessed)
the ZRP protocol, in which the amount of proactive vs reactive behavior is
*dynamically* adjusted through a single parameter - the zone radius.

Now imagine this - one could use the AODV (or DSR, or your favorite
reactive protocol) as the reactive protocol in ZRP and OLSR (or TBRPF, or
your favorite proactive protocol) as the proactive protocol in ZRP (I
tried to offend the smallest number of people here (;-)). This is why ZRP
is a framework for ... for exactly this - for "efficient operation over a 
wide range of conditions". So, maybe, there is a hope to resolve this
issue after all.

Zygmunt.
==-=-=====
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Prof. Zygmunt J. Haas                    http://people.ece.cornell.edu/haas 
Wireless Networks Laboratory		 http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu
School of Electrical Engineering         
Cornell University			 tel: +1-607-255-3454
323 Frank Rhodes Hall			 fax: +1-607-255-9072
Ithaca, NY 14853			 e-mail: [email-masked]
U.S.A                             
	WNL web page: http://wnl.ece.cornell.edu
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 15:37:15 -0400 (EDT)

Hi John,

There is a difference between an "adaptive" system and "automatically
configured" system. Adaptivity is nearly a prerequisite for any system
that needs to operate in different, and, more importantly, differing,
conditions. This does not preclude that the configuration of the system be
done manually, ... although I would suggest to leave as little to humans
as possible ... only high level decisions. Humans are good at high level
decisions, but terribe at detailed configurations.

Zygmunt.
==--==-==

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 15:37:15 -0400 (EDT)

Hi John,

Zygmunt.
==--==-==