Subject: RE: [mobile-ip] Last Call: Regional Tunneling input

From: "Emad Qaddoura" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 08:13:55 +0200

Authors,
            
            Since I have not heard back from Annika on Q1 below, I would
like to repost and get clarification from any of the co-authors/group.
Personally, reading the draft and all the if/then cases like, get the
impression that MIP will have added delay. Working for several years to
improve MIP's real-time aspects, makes me concerned about the ultimate
impact without seeing from the detailed analysis of this feature's
impact (positive/negative).
 
            I am re-stating Q2 to the authors/service providers/content
providers for their views, as location based services may require the
finer granularity of the MN's where about.
 
Thx.
EQ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------
 
1) From Section 5.0, 4th paragraph, 
"If the advertised GFA is not the same as the one the mobile node has
   registered as its care-of address, and if the mobile node is still
   within the same domain as it was when it registered that care-of
   address, the mobile node MAY try to perform a regional registration
   with its registered GFA. If the foreign agent cannot support
   regional registration to a GFA, other than advertised, the foreign
   agent denies the regional registration with code UNKNOWN_GFA (see
   section 9.3).  In this case the MN has to do a new home registration
   via the new GFA."
 
As you see, there is extra registration step here,( if the current GFA
used by the MN is not supported by the FA), adding possible delays to
traffic, would it be reasonable to expect all FAs in the same domain to
handle the regional registration to the different GFAs. Or do I
misunderstand the above paragraph?
 
With the route optimization draft being optional extensions, we should
be concerned about any additional delays to traffic destined to the MN.
 
2) If the coverage area is large, and the home network does provide
personalized content services based on the mobile node's location
(location based services) requiring a finer location, would you expect
this feature to be turned off most of the time?

---

From: "Emad Qaddoura" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 16:23:08 +0200

Annika,
 
            I would appreciate if you can answer the question below as I
have not heard if I was totally wrong in understanding the statement or
can it be enhanced?

Thanks,
Emad.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Emad Qaddoura
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 8:14 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [mobile-ip] Last Call: Regional Tunneling input
 
Authors,

 
Thx.
EQ