Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] New I-D in L3 trigger based MIPv4

From: James Kempf <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:31:41 -0800 (PST)

Hi Youngjune,

>I thought the router advt may be too heavy for this predictive L3 link
>evaluation capability discussd in the draft. Minimizing the L3 control
>signaling (if we can), seems quite significant in the operator's
>point of view. 

If you are proposing this as a replacement for the basic router/agent
advert mechanism, then I think you need to give some justification
why the basic router/agent advert mechanism is insufficient. Why
is it too heavyweight? Maybe the solution is to reduce the overhead
on the router/agent advert.

		jak

---

From: Youngjune Lee Gwon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:31:15 -0800 (PST)

James,

> why the basic router/agent advert mechanism is insufficient. 

==> I'm not trying to replace or outdate the router/agent advt
mechanism. Prediction can be based upon keeping track of the
receptions of router advt messages if frequent enough transmissions of
advt messages is permitted, e.g. in the order of less (or at most) 100ms
beaconing period.   

> Maybe the solution is to reduce the overhead on the router/agent advert.

==> I agree with you.  

Thanks, 

Youngjune