Subject: RE: [seamoby] cart-before-seamoby

From: Kulwinder Atwal <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 21:13:12 -0500

I have had a chance to go back and re-read.  Now that the email barrage has
lightened.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A. Ramalho [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 11:01 AM
To: Kulwinder Atwal; 'Gary Kenward'; 'Kulwinder Atwal'; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [seamoby] cart-before-seamoby

Fine ... engineering a particular network technology to measure these things
are
precisely what equipment manufacturers design. Is there any reason why
access points
that service a particular network technology uses cannot communicate this
information
to the point(s) in the network responsible for the (network, in your case)
decision.

I agree. 
 
That is, what of the above discussion is required to be specified by
seamoby?

We have a lot of signaling transport and control protocols at our disposal
for
this .... I see no reason why seamoby needs to (re)specify them.

In other words ... seamoby should not specify *network design* ... the
market
will decide which manufacturers/designs work the best .... or other
standards
bodies will offer design recommendations ... I think seamoby should steer
clear
of such political rat-holes!

I agree.  My only comment is instead of saying "particular network
technology" twenty times, that it may have been more communicative to say
wireless or wired.  The problem with the charter is that it devotes a
paragraph mentioning the interests of 3G cellular, giving their interests
additional weight.  Whereas, LANs get a single mention.

Again, I'd like to thank Kulwinder for the opportunity to comment ... but
these
comments highlight the need for a seamoby "problem statement" that we
can all rally behind.
 
Absolutely.  I put that out there to generate discussion.  Apparently, too
much discussion.  I have recieved about one additional personally addressed
email for every email posted to this list.
 
My hope is that such a problem statement will not suggest to the world that
we are effectively re-designing (ONLY) cellular network behavior over IP. I
would
like equipment manufacturers to do that specific job .. preferably using
(unified) design principles that are in seamoby's charter or framework
document.

Yes, and I would like commend Michael for stating some fine points.   
 
 - Kulwinder 
 
Stepping off my soapbox.

Michael A. Ramalho, Ph.D.
Office email: [email-masked]
Personal email: [email-masked]
Office: +1.732.449.5762
Cell: +1.732.809.0188
Pager: +1.800.365.4578