Subject: RE: [nemo] Re: RO for geographically dist'd HAs

From: "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 23:27:18 +0200

>>>
>> [Pascal] Hi Marcelo,
>>
>> Maybe being able to distribute the HA is a goal in itself, and the
main
>> reason for doing so on a global scale is a shorter path between the
>> mobile nodes; so global HAHA is more of a RO thing than a high
>> availability thing.
>
>so we do agree that the reasons for global haha are reliability and RO,
>right?
>
[Pascal] In my mind, as Chan-Wah points out, the focus for global HAHA
is an infrastructure-based RO rather than the availability. Global HAHA
does not describe how you handle site duplication since early in the
draft, the assumption is to partition the Aggregation into sites. To get
a site level Home Agent High Availability you need to duplicate a site
but the method would still be as described in local HAHA, but over a
longer distance.

Pascal

---

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 10:14:38 +0200

> but the method would still be as described in local HAHA, but over a

good

now, relating this to the charter, i don't see why global HAHA should 
be included as an explicit charter item and not any of the other RO 
solutions

I guess we should work on RO solutions in general and not pick any 
specific solution in the charter. rahter than that we should define 
particular problems about RO that we want to solve

Regards, marcelo