Subject: RE: [seamoby] MicroMobility Algorithm Outline Revision 0.0001

From: Kulwinder Atwal <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 05:17:15 -0500

> I agree with everything that you have said.  The only place 
> for IP is in
> switch packet flows between two different types of networks.

Let me clarify.

The place for IP based real-time messaging is over the landline IP network
between a Bluetooth Host and other Cellular Base Stations to switch IP
packet flows.  Not, over a wireless link.  We cannot achieve seamless
real-time behaviour by sending IP over a Bluetooth wireless link.  I need to
get it done over a wireless link with only 28 bytes.

- Kulwinder.

---

From: Michael Thomas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 09:52:45 -0800 (PST)

Like others, my bogosity meter just pinned. SAR's and
ROHC are your friends.

	 Mike

---

From: Pat Calhoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 07:37:36 -0800 (PST)

> get it done over a wireless link with only 28 bytes.

Given the above comment, I am sure that many responses (or flames) have
already been sent, but I am still trying to catch up to all the threads as a
result of my vacation.

<chair hat>
It is not in this WG's position to break the end to end semantics of the
Internet by creating application gateways to deal with bluetooth's
deficiencies. </chair hat>

BTW, one can compress the IPv6 headers, using ROCH, down to one byte.

PatC