| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear
Vladimir and Pertz I
think the idea of Pertz is right and I also think that MIP at the terminal
should be assumed. Pertz
has pointed out that advertisements are minimized and solicitations are sent
when prior challenge is stale in cdma2000, but if we can define multicast
management connection (CID) in 802.16 we can continuously send advertisement. My
point is that if advertisement is not delivered regularly, L3 would generate
solicitation. We can not only consider IPv4, but also consider IPv6. Advertisement
interval is very short in Mobile IPv6 and this will cause more frequent
solicitation if we don’t deliver advertisement. In
802.16, we do have quick movement detection algorithm through L2 (HO
Optimization flags). This is effective when FA or subnet changes. However,
because we don’t have L2.5 yet, L3 is independent of the L2. Therefore, even
though L2 detects movement and finds out no need to change FA, L3 would still check
for periodic advertisement. If MSS doesn’t receive advertisement within
lifetime then it will generate solicitation. Once multicast management
connection is defined, it is safer to transmit periodic advertisement message. Best
Regards, Ronny
Kim LG
Electronics, Inc. -----Original Message----- Although your idea of Mobile IP client proxy at the BS
is a good one, it ignores the legacy terminals (i.e. CDMA) that do support
MIP clients. If we were to interoperate across technologies (as we attempt in
802.21) most likely MIP proxy can't be assumed in every BS. In cdma2000 where BW is
even more limited, we implemented MIP clients and advertisement is done only
upon network entry. Thereafter advertisements are minimized and
solicitations are sent when prior challenge is stale. You may argue that in 802.16
advertisements are required to detect movement, but this is where 802.21 should help
with a quicker movement detection through L2 or L2.5 mechanisms. Bottom line, for inter-technology handover, MIP at the
terminal should be assumed. Peretz Feder |