Subject: [mobile-ip] Beyond draft 18

From: "Alan O'Neill" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 05:32:36 -0400

I have a few concerns about some features in draft 18 when applied in
specific future deployment scenarios (ie not protocol problems for now but I
guess applicability issues). 

Specifically they relate to the applicability of the existing RO mechanisms
during rapid movement that may be possible in future cellular networks with
small cells (eg a Manhatten deployment). In contrast the existing mechanisms
seem ok for 3GPPx and 802.11 clusters where movement is less rapid due to
the existance of radio specific hand-off protocols such as RNC relocation
and IAPP etc.

I have discussed these issues with the chairs and they have recommended I
write up a detailed draft because of the complexities and subtleties
involved. I agree with the chairs that these may have to be post base spec
given the significant investment to date. However, I hope the draft will
motivate future additional RO design work in this space and may even attempt
to indicate specific requirements and solution options so we can avoid any
major barriers to this in the base spec. I guess any near term design work
might fit in with some of the stuff coming from last nights BAR BOF..

If people have similar concerns then by all means contact me
privately..although it might be worth waiting for the draft for obvious
reasons..

Alan.

****************************************************************************
************************************
This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
of the
intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is strictly
prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender and delete
all copies.
****************************************************************************
*************************************

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 04:03:43 -0700

Alan,

Performance of RO was a key issue in last night's BAR BOF. A draft with your
views would be helpful.

            jak

---

From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 11:29:11 -0700

hi Alan,

Alan O'Neill wrote:
> small cells (eg a Manhatten deployment). 

Fast Handoffs (specifically FMIPv6). it moves the RO part out of the
critical stage, by tunneling to the oldCoA of the MN from the oldAR.
the MN has enough time to do Return Routability based RO.

this statement is not conformant to the IETF policy. this prevents me
from forwarding this mail to anyone I wish.

regards
Vijay