Subject: Re: [manet] #41 (aodvv2): AckReq vs RREP_ACK

From: Thomas Heide Clausen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 15:32:42 +0200

On that token, I do know what "interoperable" means, but "compatible with" doesn't make much sense to me.

-- 
Thomas Heide Clausen
http://www.thomasclausen.org

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for 
  experiments, and they wander off through equation 
  after equation, and eventually  build a structure 
  which has no relation to reality."
 - Nikola Tesla, 
    Modern Mechanics and Inventions, July, 1934

> On 31 mai 2014, at 21:57, Jiazi YI <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 4:56 AM, Charlie Perkins <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> <snip>
>> The case for removing RREP_ACK is to simplify the protocol.
>> 
>> The case for including RREP_ACK is to have an AODVv2-specific
>> mechanism and, along the way, to enable better compatibility
>> with previous approaches.
> 
> <snip> 
> 
> Maybe I missed something here. By saying "better compatibility with previous approaches", do you mean RFC 3561?
> 
> Jiazi
> 
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet