Re: b.a.t.m.a.n. specification

[Simon Wunderlich <sw@simonwunderlich.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2040 bytes --]

Hi Fernando,

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 5:07:00 PM CEST Fernando Gont wrote:
> Hello, folks,
> 
> While looking at batman, I came across your IETF Internet-Draft
> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-openmesh-b-a-t-m-a-n-00.txt.
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1) Is this the closest there is to an specification of batman?

Yes, that's the closest complete specification. There are various aspects 
documented on open-mesh.org in the documentation section, although those are 
not really complete.

> 
> 2) Does it described the current protocol, or have there been changes
> since then that have not been reflected into the internet-draft?


There have been various changes. The algorithm described in the internet draft 
was called B.A.T.M.A.N. III ; there have been amendments which have been then 
implemented as algorithm version B.A.T.M.A.N. IV. Since then, batman-adv has 
been implemented as Layer 2 mesh software (BATMAN as described was a Layer 3 
routing daemon). There have been more modifications since then like multi 
interface routing, bonding, interface alternating, bridge loop avoidance etc.

See: https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/BATMAN_IV

> 
> 3) Any reason why the draft wasn't published as an IETF RFC?


The initial draft received various devastating reviews from some professors, 
including missing mathematical proofs and that we should change the name since 
it was considered ridiculous. We thought otherwise, but didn't want to spend 
energy making reviewers happy. Instead we focused on the software itself. I 
believe the original draft received around a thousand scientific references 
(although nobody should reference IETF drafts, but after all its the most 
complete document there is). Batman-adv is now in the Linux kernel, and the 
old Layer 3 BATMAN daemon development is pretty much abandoned for years, but 
still available for download. Almost everyone is using the layer 2 variant, 
which wouldn't fit well with IETF in the first place but would more be an IEEE 
thing.

Cheers,
       Simon

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]