Subject: RE: [manet] question on RREP

From: DANIEL BYRNE <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:03:44 -0600

In AODV for instance, the RREP just gets lost because it is unicast back.  I believe however that this shouldn't be the case.  The RREP should be able to take a different route back to the source of the RREQ if neccessary.  
 
For instance, if the RREQ transmitting station has a more powerful transmitter, he could reach further into the web looking for a node that is closer to his destination to deliver his packet.  If however, the radio he reaches cannot get back to him without making a hop through another node in the
return path because of a weaker transmitter, this should be allowed.  Maybe you can work on an elegant solution to this problem in your research.

 -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Ehsan Hamadani
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 8:42 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [manet] question on RREP

Sorry , in the third line I made a mistake by using RREP, it should be RREQ. So this is my question :
 
Hi all
I am a PhD student and it is just about 2 months that I have started my research on Ad-Hoc networks.
My question is that in all reactive routing protocols, we assume that RREP follows the reverse path in which RREQ has arrived, so what will happen if in the return path one of the links are broken?? Does the destination start a routing discovery to destination?
 
I would be thankful if someone can answer me.
 
Regards
 
Ehsan