Subject: SeaMoby, MANET, MIP & the Universe! WAS: [seamoby] Yet Another BO F?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:56:20 +0200

Hi Kulwinder,

> Why 'MUST' SeaMoby be confined by MANET/MIP?  
> If SeaMoby does its job there will be no need for MANET in 
> local mobility.
> If SeaMoby does its job there will be no need for MIP in 
> local mobility.

The 'MUST' in the section you quoted stated: 	

   Therefore, SeaMoby MUST be able to co-exist gracefully 
   with any MANET solutions algorithm that does become standardized.

because I am not going to re-write all of MANET & all of MIP
for all of the Internet.  Part of SeaMoby is focused on 
MM and I do not want to expand that scope.  Also, I favor
reuse whenever possible - creating new protocols for the
sake of new protocols is not a good idea.  Of course, we
do need to examine existing solutions & if they are not
sufficient, then that would be a good reason to do something
new.

I still strongly feel that SeaMoby may apply certain parts
of MIP & MANET in a novel way to solve these problems.

> The title of the section says ,"Comparion", but states a mandatory
> requirement.
> By making MANET a 'MUST' requirement for Seamoby is a sure 
> way to see that Seamoby is never deployed.

Nope, MANET is not a MUST requirement, but stating if MANET
& SeaMoby overlap/interact, they MUST do so gracefully.

br,
John