Subject: RE: [Ospf-wireless-design] Suggestion for a Lead

From: "Henderson, Thomas R" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:02:04 -0700

Thank you for the support.  I would be willing to do this if
the rest of the group is happy with it.

It's still my understanding that Acee and Joe are to work on
some more focused problem statement, and to help that effort, 
we as group members are to express the operational scenarios 
and technical constraints that we most care about.

Tom

_______________________________________________
Ospf-wireless-design mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-wireless-design

---

From: Richard <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:32:39 -0700

I also agree that Tom is a good choice, since he seems to be
considering and evaluating alternative solutions in a fair,
unbiased manner.

I think we should define a set of scenarios that define our
goals, so that we agree on a basis for comparing different
solutions.  These scenarios should vary in number of nodes
(up to 250 perhaps), number of neighbors (again up to 250),
node speed (from stationary to perhaps 65 mph for cars), and different
link rates (perhaps down to 256 kbps if possible). It need not be
a *requirement* to perform well in every scenario, but a solution
that does would be preferable. (We shouldn't limit our goals too
much in advance.)

Richard