Re: [LinkSec] Failure of probe mechanisms to scale
Thanks Mick,
Mick Seaman wrote:
>
>
> Mats,
>
> Depends what you mean by fundamental, since this is a question of scale
I guess I am asking if a solution to the bridge failure/reconfig case
would imply a solution to the mobility problem and/or conversely.
I guess one fundamental difference is that mobility can in many cases
be predicted/signalled some time in advance, whereas failures cannot.
Thus, handling mobility by a general reconfig solution might be
unnecessarily clumsy (though perhaps theoretically possible).
> i.e.
> of numbers. How many systems appear to move, in what timescale, in what
> time
> do other systems need to detect and restore or replace out dated
> information, where are the systems that can directly detect the move and
> how
> much information do they need to transfer to those that need to know but
> have no way of detecting the change. Conversely, is the set of information
> that could be shared before hand to remedy a time race large, and indeed
> what classifications of system types against a number of architectural
> variants are permitted.
>
> I suppose that if the number of end stations is 'E' and their mobility rate
> 'e' while the number of bridges is 'B' and their acceptable reconfiguration
> time rate for 95% upper case failure is 'b' then one could describe
> solutions as fundamentally different as they scale as O(Ee) or O(Bb) or
> some
> powers thereof or relationship between these and other parameters. In those
> cases one could identify, against any particular solution, that some
> network
> changes are fundamentally different to some others.
I guess if the network is designed to "encourage" user mobility, the
rate of mobility related events will generally be much higher than
other types of reconfig events...
Thanks
/Mats
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-linksec@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-linksec@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mats
> Naslund
> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 7:37 AM
> To: Russ Housley
> Cc: mick_seaman@ieee.org; stds-802-linksec@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [LinkSec] Failure of probe mechanisms to scale
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> Out of curiosity: is there a fundamental difference (in terms
> of discovering/solving) between this scenario and the case of "mobiltity"?
>
> E.g. the fact that Y is connected via C rather than B could
> depend either on the fact that:
>
> * the path A -> B is down
> * Y has moved and is reachable from C, but no longer from B
> (e.g. Y pulled the 802.3 plug and is in the corridor using 802.11)
>
> Thanks
>
> /Mats