The IESG has approved the following document: - 'An Optimization for the MANET Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)' (draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-optimization-04.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Alia Atlas. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-optimization/ Technical Summary The link quality mechanism of the MANET Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) enables "ignoring" some 1-hop neighbors if the measured link quality from that 1-hop neighbor is below an acceptable threshold, while still retaining the corresponding link information as acquired from HELLO message exchange. This allows immediate reinstatement of the 1-hop neighbor if the link quality later improves sufficiently. NHDP also collects information about symmetric 2-hop neighbors. However it specifies that if a link from a symmetric 1-hop neighbor ceases being symmetric, including while "ignored" as described above, then corresponding symmetric 2-hop neighbors are removed. This may lead to symmetric 2-hop neighborhood information being permanently removed (until further HELLO messages are received) if the link quality of a symmetric 1-hop neighbor drops below the acceptable threshold, even if only for a moment. This specification updates RFC6130 "Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)", and RFC7181 "The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 (OLSRv2)" to permit retaining, but ignoring, symmetric 2-hop information when the link quality from the corresponding 1-hop neighbor drops below the acceptable threshold. This allows immediate reinstatement of the symmetric 2-hop neighbor if the link quality later improves sufficiently, thus making the symmetric 2-hop neighborhood more "robust". Working Group Summary A question was raised by one participant about whether it is appropriate to claim this work as an optimization with providing quantified measurements, however, the working group felt that the improvements offered a quite clearly an optimization in terms of reduced message exchanges and more rapid recovery from transitory failures, and so no further documentation was necessary. The consensus behind publication of this document as an Proposed Standard RFC appears solid. Document Quality: There are multiple implementations. No MIB doctor, Media Type or other expert reviews have been done. Personnel: The Document Shepherd is Ulrich Herberg. The Responsible Area Director is Adrian Farrel.
