What is your most missed feature/protocol in INET?

[Rudolf Hornig]

Hello fellow INET users,

What is your favorite feature that is still missing from INET? What protocol you would love to see?

Let's share your opinion here (please answer by replying to this email). 

Rudolf

[Pavan Kumar R]

AOMDV

[Frank]

I would be happy about some sophisticated debugging features. A lot of times it is hard to understand what exactly is happening in simulations, especially in scenarios featuring high network loads. Furthermore, a well written documentation including detailed module explanations would be nice.

[uwerothfeld]

In addition to Franks post: IMHO, please tune up the INET code first. Most often, reading the code is the last choice to get additional hints and a kind of understanding to fix an issue. Unfortunately, the code quality is often very poor, and modules does not working well together. Thus, improve code quality, usability and debugging is more appropriated instead adding additional features. just my 2 cents ;)

[Rudolf Hornig]

Could you elaborate what kind of debugging help you would love to see? Any wild idea is useful here. Worst case it cannot be implemented. It would be useful too, if you could describe the whole usecase (debugging) where you are struggling.

[Frank Wetzels]

I concur with Frank. Some kind of (brief) description of how to add/create protocols would be very helpful.

Regards,

Frank

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "omnetpp" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Frank Wetzels

frank....@cwi.nl

Cell: +31 6437 95508

[uwerothfeld]

Hey Rudolf,

one annoying debugging use case is to solve omnet errors, caused during the initialize phase. most often, omnet simple provides: there is an error, without any details. the question is, is it possible to print the relevant states and configurations of each complete or partly loaded modules first into an separated logfile? is it possible to display the properties that cause the error? for example, if you have a IP routing related issue, it is hard to determine the IP setup and routing tables of all modules, at least for modules with up to 100 nodes, in case of an initialize related error.  

In addition, for a number of INET modules you can use a kind of config file to set up the module, instead of using the single properties. Why the hell is each config file differently to define? Why does omnet not providing any kind of general config process, useable within all modules and easy to handle with tools from the omnet outside world (pur xml editor or something else)? It seems that omnet defines for each problem its own solution, instead of relaying to other solutions. It would be great to save and provide the configuration for each module in a generic style. the requirements for such a usecase would be:

- save/load the config for a specific sub module

- save/load the config the config for a complete scenario

- unify the configuration of scenario manager, IPconfiguration and Internet cloud and so on

sometimes, configure the simulation well is difficult. thus, a config preprocessor that parses the provided configfile and checks: style, syntax and parameter clashes would be helpful. :D  

best

uwe

[Shima Bolboli]

hi Rudolf

some unstructured protocol such as Gnutella or gossiping based protocol

[Mahyuddin Husairi]

batman-adv = layer 2 manet routing 

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

the actual implementation of batman can work in the link layer, in reality all manet routing protocols that descend from BasicManetRouting can work in the link layer

---

Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 08:47:58 -0700
From: mahy...@gmail.com
To: omn...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Omnetpp-l] Re: What is your most missed feature/protocol in INET?

[Mahyuddin Husairi]

Wow, it's my honour to get a reply from inetmanet maintainer, Prof Alfonso Ariza Quintana. 

Just some questions from omnet++/inet beginner user

1. Is it worth to write a new module to reflect batman-adv instead using batmand for my batman-adv simulation?

As far as i know, instead layer 3 vs layer 2, both have other differences such as 

- batmand = batman protocol version 3 vs batman-adv = batman protocol version 4. 

- batmand = user space application vs batman-adv = kernel module (not important in omnet++ of course). 

- batmand = dead, no further development and replaced with other project, bmx vs batman-adv = actively developed by current batman community.

2. If the efforts of developing batman-adv module is worth, can i asking your permission to push that code into your inetmanet repository (my assumption is, instead push the codes directly into inet git repository, its is more appropriate to push it into your inetmanet repository first)?

thanks.

On Thursday, July 25, 2013 10:47:27 PM UTC+8, Rudolf Hornig wrote:

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

 

I don’t know the differences between batman-adv 4 versus batman, but probably it is easier to adapt these differences to that actual batman code that start an implementation from scratch, at least that last time that I have checked batman-adv (it was version 2) the data bases were similar.

And no problem to include your protocol in inetmanet

--

[anypoi...@gmail.com]

If INET have the protocol of 802.11ac or 802.11n ,I will be appreciated.

在 2013年7月25日星期四UTC+8下午10时47分27秒，Rudolf Hornig写道：

[Pegasus Xuthus]

I suppose that the debugging stuffs are not the problem of the INET framework. It would be the feature of the ellipse-similared environment.

Best Wishes,

Peng 

[Pegasus Xuthus]

Hi Rudolf,

As far as I'm concerned, compared with another modules in INET framework, I suppose that the PHY layer would be improved. Nowadays version only implements the Radio functionality simply. Can we consider importing another features in PHY layer, like modulation, coding and so on.

Best wishes,

Peng 

[Rudolf Hornig]

MIXIM will be integrated into INET with a much more realistic physical model. Also the radio/mac layer will have a defined interface so it will be possible to replace the lower radio/physical layers.

[Rasha Kaiss]

Hi all
vanet routing protocols still missing

[Alvaro Barradas]

Hi Rudolf

If this is not a stale thread... 6LoWPAN please!

Greetings

-ab-

[madan lal Tetarwal]

handover procedure in IEEE 802.11 WLAN

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Shawgi Mahmoud <rokl...@gmail.com> wrote:

hi rudolf im still waiting your answer about my question please dont ignore me im waiting you bro best regards

shawgi

On Thursday, July 25, 2013 10:47:27 PM UTC+8, Rudolf Hornig wrote:

Hello fellow INET users,

What is your favorite feature that is still missing from INET? What protocol you would love to see?

Let's share your opinion here (please answer by replying to this email). 

Rudolf

--

[Michael Kirsche]

We created a 6LoWPAN simulation model for use with INETMANET (current revision) and sooner (or later) INET (combined with a new 802.15.4 model).

Take a look at our website: https://www-rnks.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/~6lowpan4omnet

Regards,
Michael

[Alvaro Barradas]

Good to know Michael. I'll take a look.

Thank you very much for the pointer.

Regards

-ab-

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "omnetpp" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
Alvaro Barradas

University of the Algarve

Campus de Gambelas, FCT, DEEI

8005-139 Faro, Portugal

email: aba...@ualg.pt

web: http://w3.ualg.pt/~abarra

line: +351 289800905

[Manolis]

Dear Rudolf,

Currently started working with AQM in Omnet++, so I would love to have had ECN support! (if already there I ve not found it). I was thinking to write my own module so if that is something that could come up soon from your end, I can wait a little.

On the contribution side (on the AQM topic), I ve implemented a CoDelQueue module which I m starting to test, and which I could make available relatively soon if there is interest. Next in the pipeline would also be PIE.

Regards

Manolis.

On Thursday, July 25, 2013 4:47:27 PM UTC+2, Rudolf Hornig wrote:

[amrcg]

IEEE 802.15.4, 6LoWPAN and RPL. 

[Michael Kirsche]

We have a IEEE 802.15.4 model for INET (and INETMANET) and a 6LoWPAN model (both INET and INETMANET). Problem is that we finished it before the new LifeCycle thing was introduced to INET, therefore certain modifications are necessary.
The models itself are not included in INET (yet), you would need to use a "patched" INET as soon as I've integrated the LifeCycle infrastructure.
Keep an eye out for news on the list... I'll post a message when I rewrote the necessary parts so that the modules are compatible with the latest INET.

[Diego]

Hi Rudolf, nice question!

I would love to see two protocol gaining a lot of interest:
OPENFLOW and SIP.

 

Cheers

[Daniel Pfefferkorn]

IMHO something that would probably really accelerate the development of
new protocols is a base class for a generic protocol state machine.

It could provide data structures and automated state transition
functions, which can be used to quickly create a protocol sceleton.

In turn, it would be possible to extract the state machine including
transistions and their conditions, if certain coding conventions were
used. This would make it possible to draw transition diagrams etc.
allowing for much faster verification & easier documentation.

I know it is alot to ask, but I am certain that this would be a big step
forward towards a unified look & feel among protocol implementations.

As always: Keep up the incredibly good work!

Regards,
Daniel

Am 25.07.2013 16:47, schrieb Rudolf Hornig:
> Hello fellow INET users,
>
> What is your favorite feature that is still missing from INET? What
> protocol you would love to see?
>
> Let's share your opinion here (please answer by replying to this email).
> Rudolf
>

> --
> --
> Sent from the OMNeT++ mailing list. To configure your membership,
> visit http://groups.google.com/group/omnetpp
>
> ---

[Rudolf Hornig]

Hello all, thanks for the recommendations. Keep it coming...

As for state machine support, we were toying recently with integrating the state machine compiler (http://smc.sourceforge.net/) into the omnet toolchain. It looks promising but needs some modifications here and there. It has it's own language to describe the state machine and can generate base classes and documentation, too.

There is also an ongoing work (available in INET's integration branch) that aims to improve the base services of INET (better pluggable mosules, more interfaces between the modules etc.)

Rudolf

[Farida]

Hi Rudolf,

I found omnet++ a very powerful tool and it would be very useful to have NAT implementation in INET. Do you have any plan to release any new version of INET including NAT in upcoming months?

Thanks,
Farida

[Pedro Santos]

Full integration of MiXiM and INET(MANET) would be really great!

Best,
Pedro

On Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:47:27 PM UTC+1, Rudolf Hornig wrote:

[Rudolf Hornig]

There is currently a work under way to implement a much better physical layer that would use both MIXIM and the current INET's implementation.

[Nassima]

i would like really to see multipath and quality of service routing protocols in wireless sensor networks, it will be really great 

and will motivate more researchers 'who work on QoS and routing in wireless sensor networks" to work with omnet
i hope find this as soon as possible

All regards

[Konrad Połys]

Hi!
I would love to see a function that allow reading SNR value of packets incoming to Radio module. 
Now it's quite complicated and I think that couple of people will be glad to get such function.

Best regards,

Konrad

[Mikhail Kulikov]

Dear Rudolf, as for me it would be useful to have a look at some TDMA(wireless) realisation and for some realisation of geographical routing protocol. Maybe, some simple examples which developers will use as a start point to make their own projects: how to create a frame, choose and change slot, how to get node position and use it in protocol etc. While looking for questions in this group I decided that it is an actual wish of many INET users.

четверг, 25 июля 2013 г., 18:47:27 UTC+4 пользователь Rudolf Hornig написал:

[Rudolf Hornig]

Integration of MiXiM and a full redesign of the physical/link layer radio framework in INET is in progress. (scheduled for INET 3.0)

On Monday, 10 February 2014 16:27:00 UTC+1, Pedro Santos wrote:

[Rudolf Hornig]

Levente Mészáros is had worked on the NetworkLayer redesign recently. The new network layer (for INET 3.0) will be much easier to extend. As a proof of concept he had implemented GPSR. The protocol was backported to the INET 2.x so that is also available on the master branch and will be included in the soon to be released 2.3 version.

As for TDMA I'm not aware that anybody is working on that :(

Rudolf

[Sh Asaadi]

Hi Rudolf.

Is there any trust-based aodv protocol in INET? I need a little help about the trust-based aodv algorithm code.

Thanks.

[stars york]

It is possible to integrate INET with Inetmanet? These two module have a lot of the same things.

If INET have full 802.11s capabilities, I think many people will appreciate it. 

Thanks

Rudolf Hornig於 2014年3月17日星期一UTC+8下午5時48分24秒寫道：

[Rudolf Hornig]

INETMANET is a fork of INET with additional protocols. Ariza (the INETMANET maintainer) is doing a great job on integrating diverse protocols and models into INETMANET and at the same time he keeps it in sync with INET. 

We try to keep INET a bit more conservative and we tend to add only protocols/models that are deemed to be:

- generally useful (i.e. it is a generally accepted protocol and not just some experimental stuff for someone's theses)

- the protocol must be correctly implemented and documented

- the code quality and architecture must meet some level.

As the maintainers of INET we always run into the problem that we are primarily 'software guys', we can decide whether the code r the software architecture is good, but we have no idea whether a protocol is useful or whether the behavior of the protocol is correct.

I've always 'dreamed' :) that some day people who know a particular protocol well would group and would recommend a protocol to be included in INET.

i.e. It would be great if 3 people who know the 802.11s well, would check the code and would came up with the recommendation that we should add it to the base INET and would would take the responsibility to review ANY patches against the part, so we could be be sure that the quality says...

On the other hand we could add our expertise on software design side. 

I wish this will happen someday :), but until then we are rather conservative what goes into INET...

Rudolf

[Rudolf Hornig]

On Wednesday, 2 April 2014 11:55:30 UTC+2, Sh Asaadi wrote:

Hi Rudolf.

Is there any trust-based aodv protocol in INET? I need a little help about the trust-based aodv algorithm code.

Thanks.

There is an ongoing re-implementaion of the AODV protocol that will go into the next INET version. I'm not aware of any trust-based algorithm.

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

http://www.paser.info/

Paser is already included in inetmanet, this protocol include security mechanisms

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "omnetpp" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[turingns2]

Most wanted feature: correct the bug about drop of packets in ALL inet/Ethernet applications. Best regards!

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/omnetpp/7MXXGlkvwWE

[Joseph]

Rudolf,

I wonder whether it's possible to implement a greedy TCP source (i.e., a TCP source with an infinite message length).

Although this traffic model is unrealistic, it is used in many studies on TCP performances and already available in ns-2.

Regards,

Joseph

[Sarwar]

Hi Rudolf,

I wrote some interaction protocols in Omentpp 4.1 last year. Now i want to switch to omentpp 4.4.1, and the code gives me linking error. Can you please help me.

<!> Error in module (cCompoundModule) ICCETest.Node1 (id=2) during network setup: Class "DisplayNode" not found -- perhaps its code was not linked in, or the class wasn't registered with Register_Class(), or in the case of modules and channels, with Define_Module()/Define_Channel().

Thanks for giving me your time..
Kind Regards,


2014년 5월 28일 수요일 오후 9시 44분 3초 UTC+9, Joseph 님의 말:

[Nassima]

Dear Rudolf and all researchers,

i would like to see multipath routing protocols for wireless sensor networks like EQSR for exemple or other ones, it"s really soooooooooooooo important for me, because i want to implement my routing protocol and compare it whith an other recent one.generally researchers choose simulators basing on its library to facilitate the work. For me for example i'm interrested by castalia and omnet in general, and i want really to facilitate me the work to do by finding an implement protocol.

please i wait your reply

All regars.

[navide bahar]

Dear Nassima

please update me If you get any help since I have the same problem

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "omnetpp" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/omnetpp/PARzjfCvR80/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.

[Sudheer Palinandi]

dear sir,

 

I have successfully installed omnet 4.4.1 version in windows 8 .iam facing problems in installing inet framework please assist me

 

sudheer

 

sudhee...@gmail.com

On Thursday, July 25, 2013 8:17:27 PM UTC+5:30, Rudolf Hornig wrote:

[Adán G. Medrano]

Hi Rudolph!

I like to see VRR (virtual ring routing), DART(Dynamic Address Routing), and AIR (automatic incremental routing); they are prefix-based routing protocols for MANETs.

[shil]

Hi,

I would love to see IEEE 802.11p on PHY layer of INET.


Regards
Shil

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

The mac and physical model is include

 

De: omn...@googlegroups.com [mailto:omn...@googlegroups.com] En nombre de shil
Enviado el: lunes, 14 de julio de 2014 14:54
Para: omn...@googlegroups.com
Asunto: [Omnetpp-l] Re: What is your most missed feature/protocol in INET?

 

Hi,

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "omnetpp" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.

[Firmin M]

Hello Rudolf,

I would like to have to see The MPTCP (Multi Path TCP) implementation. This newly standardized protocol is gaining interest because it has interesting features.

[spiceyaamir1]

A clear mechanism of how to interlink inet with mixim.... in addition there should be a mechanism which allows us to use any routing protocol in any inet project..... just the case when you start a new mixim project and its asks you about the nature of the network along with the routing mechanism....

[Tian Bin]

Hi Rudolf

We had met at Community Summit, on 2 September. 

I would like to combine DSRC/WAVE standard (IEEE1609.x and IEEE802.11p), I heard about the INET 3.0 will combine more underlying layer of MIXIM, I except it !!

Best Wishes! 

[Rudolf Hornig]

We are right now preparing INET 2.99.0 which will be the first development snapshot leading to 3.0. Stay tuned :)

Rudolf

[Roberto Estevez]

Hello Rudolf,

I miss a simple routing protocol that is able to handle wired as well as wireless hosts. It have to work with out any route and gateway setup within the IPNetworkConfigurator (as today needed in the not reliable working OSPF).

best.

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

Batman should support wired and wireless network

 

 

De: omn...@googlegroups.com [mailto:omn...@googlegroups.com] En nombre de Roberto Estevez
Enviado el: miércoles, 10 de septiembre de 2014 14:26
Para: omn...@googlegroups.com
Asunto: [Omnetpp-l] Re: What is your most missed feature/protocol in INET?

 

Hello Rudolf,

I miss a simple routing protocol that is able to handle wired as well as wireless hosts. It have to work with out any route and gateway setup within the IPNetworkConfigurator (as today needed in the not reliable working OSPF).

best.

--

[Roberto Estevez]

but its not part of INET ;) by the way, OSPF have problems of handle hosts within the same subset, connected via different routers.

i will test batman in the future

[Roberto Estevez]

i forget to mention that batman is in general not part of a standard based LAN, which provides access for 802.11-bases hosts via access points as widely used. ;)

Am Mittwoch, 10. September 2014 15:28:06 UTC+2 schrieb Alfonso Ariza Quintana:

[Khalid BinAfif]

Hi,

The INET has a lot of integrated components. However, Network Address Translation (NAT) is still missing and not implemented in the gateway router. It would be great if anyone guide me to any current implementation for STUN (Session Traversal Utilities for NAT) protocol. Actually, I need NAT implement the STUN server model. 

Regards,

Khalid 

[Mac Sar]

Hi,

I'd like to eventually see the mixim integrated into inet. I need 802.15.4 and other physical layers in inet.

The beta of inet+mixim has become old and the provided archive cannot be compiled (missing files).

[Rudolf Hornig]

Take a look at INET 2.99.0 (integration branch). There is a brand new physical layer containing all the features of MIXIM

[Qutab Qazi]

I for one would love to see a feature that when you open the event log it first displays you a filtering option. Most of the times the event log is big and opening it takes a lot of time. If we are able to filter the contents prior to its opening it could be very efficient. Thanks.

[Rudolf Hornig]

Would you mind filing a bug/feature request for this? This sounds like a useful enhancement.

[Parag Sewalkar]

Hello,

It would be good to have HWMP again. As per release notes of INET, it was removed:

===

INET-1.99.5 (June 22, 2012)

Updated 802.11 model from INETMANET-2.0 @ 7fb431b (minor bugfixes)
All files are synced. The following features were omitted:
MULTIQUEUES, HWMP and MESH networking related code.

=== 

It would be good to have it back.

Regards,

Parag

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

The code is in inetmanet, you can use it

 

 

De: omn...@googlegroups.com [mailto:omn...@googlegroups.com] En nombre de Parag Sewalkar
Enviado el: viernes, 06 de febrero de 2015 11:03
Para: omn...@googlegroups.com
Asunto: [Omnetpp-l] Re: What is your most missed feature/protocol in INET?

 

Hello,

--

[Boushra Jaber]

I search to connect omnet with multimedia player like VLC this feature help us to see the result by video

[Samoda Gamage]

Currently the 802.11 supports only upto "g" mode. I would like to see it extended to "n" or "ac" modes.

[Kan]

I would say TDMA. I really really need it!

[mohammadreza marashifard]

Hello.
The protocol for the management of the grid?

[Shaikha Al-Khuder]

It'll be great to have a framework that simulate multiple attacks, replay, DDoS,...etc.

[Ahmed Amer Shahin]

Hello,

Currently I am doing research on the use of Wi-Fi Direct for data dissemination in smart phones.

I like to have the ability to simulate the Wi-Fi Direct Protocol using INET to be able to do large scale tests. 

The current implementation of 802.11 protocol does not have support for such protocol.

Regards,

--Ahmed Shahin

[Ghaith Mansour]

wireless open flow components in order to simulate VANETs in SDN