Subject: Re: [Seamoby] Examples of CAR discovery

From: "Govind Krishnamurthi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 10:29:16 -0500

Hello all,
I think that figuring out whether the AR that the MN is going to get IP 
connectivity from has the necessary QoS support for the MN is in the scope 
of CAR discovery as this is an IP capability.

The second scenario illustrated in the Issues draft
as a justification for the need of CAR discovery,
is very similar to the example that Charlie pointed out.
It talks about the case when a MN moves into a different AR's domain and
that AR cannot support the MN's QoS needs. This example from the Issues 
draft, talks about the MN not connecting to the new AR if the AR cannot 
support the MN.

I therefore think this clearly is a case where CAR discovery is useful.
I think that QoS support in the AR is an IP capability of the AR and 
therefore CAR discovery can help.

My two cents,
Best regards,
Govind.

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 09:08:19 -0800

Govind,

As I mentioned to Charlie, I don't see a problem with advertising
configured QoS and having the mobile use that as a possible criteria on
an intertechnology handover, for example. Where I have a problem is in
using QoS as a first order deterimant of handover, on the order of
power.

            jak

----- Original Message -----
From: "Govind Krishnamurthi" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 7:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Seamoby] Examples of CAR discovery

> Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 09:08:19 -0800

Govind,

            jak