Subject: Re: [seamoby] Re: New name -> Seamless to become Hidden Handover? ?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:41:01 -0600

Please respond to Patrice Calhoun <[email-masked]>
See what I mean, now?

pdn>You almost have the right end-to-end argument and I do
pdn>understand that it makes complete sense when talking about
pdn>routers.  So...
pdn>
pdn>YES.  However, most radio links already do retransmits for
pdn>end-to-end reliable protocols take RLP in cdma2000 or RLC
pdn>in UMTS your favorite 3G standards I believe.  Neither of
pdn>these can provide multi-homing like SCTP.  Suppose that
pdn>you have a bunch of bumble bees hovering around the hive
pdn>and each of them is a router.

pdn>Do you see what I mean now???

Phil

---

From: Patrice Calhoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:38:02 -0800 (PST)

> pdn>understand that it makes complete sense when talking about

ok....

> pdn>and each of them is a router.

Actually, to be fair, the radio guys provide *two* different type of service
over the air (each in separate channels). Real-Time traffic is sent through
one type of channel, which does NOT provide retransmission at the link layer,
and normal traffic uses a channel that does provide retransmission.

> pdn>Do you see what I mean now???

Not within the context of the IETF I don't. As you see above, even the radio
guys know that *some* traffic shouldn't be retransmitted. I would hate to have
to impose such intelligence in routers as well.

PatC