Re: [802.21] Comments on 21-06-0698-01-0000_IP_configuration_methods_IE.doc
Hi, Srini,
Srinivas.Sreemanthula@nokia.com wrote:
> Hi Qiaobing,
> Thanks for the responses.
>
> The main issue is lack of understanding of the proposed solution. What
> would be good is to show all the relevant scenarios where this is useful
> along a flow diagram on how it is used based on current IP configuration
> principles showing the overall solution. If you think that some current
> IP address config mechanisms or mobility mechanisms are affected with
> this proposal, please point out the gaps. Also please highlight the
> latency benefits of the proposal.
Have we requested the same for POA Location IE, or POA Address IE (just
pick a couple as examples)? Do you know the "latency benefits" of having
POA Location IE, or POA Address IE?
I don't mind to discuss with you about these issues and actually there
are already several contributions in the 802.21 document tree discussing
the scenarios and use cases. However, I'd hate to see a double standard
being applied to a particular IE proposal. Please see my response to
Yoshi earlier for more on this.
>
>>but some will not.
>
> The question is, based on what assumption are these IE proposed? If
> there is FMIP then the IP address in target network is provided in the
> FMIP signaling. Why do we need this configuration methods or DHCP server
> address?
You've just answered your own question. If the upper layer does not have
FMIP, then this IE become useful and needed. Remember, it's only an IE
and the upper layer can decide whether to use it or not. If the upper
layer has already had its own way of doing the same thing, it simply
won't query/use this IE.
regards,
-Qiaobing
>
>
>>This is actually a policy question.
>
> Agree, the issue is to find such administrators who would set such a
> policy and sell our technology. :-)
>
> Regards,
> Srini
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Qiaobing Xie [mailto:Qiaobing.Xie@MOTOROLA.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 12:48 AM
> To: STDS-802-21@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [802.21] Comments on
> 21-06-0698-01-0000_IP_configuration_methods_IE.doc
>
> Hi, Srini,
>
> ...
>
>>Are you assuming that there is no IP mobility signaling like FMIPv6 to
>
>
>>minimize the handover latency?
>
>
> I assume nothing here. In other words, I assume some upper layers will
> involve FMIPv6-like thing to minimize the handover latency, but some
> will not.
>
>
>>Another question, do you think the dhcp servers should provide IP
>>address leases for hosts that are not on the link?
>
>
> This is actually a policy question. We enable the technology here while
> trusting the user of the technology will use it wisely under his/her
> policy boundaries.
>
> regards,
> -Qiaobing
>
>
>>Regards,
>>Srini
>
>
>