hi Sebastian : comments inline:D
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Sebastian Kiesel <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi stefano, > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:17:33AM +0200, stefano previdi wrote: > > On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:22 AM, Sebastian Kiesel wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:15:11AM +0800, ?????? wrote: > >>> hi, everyone: > >>> > >>> have the ALTO considered the use cases of wireless, which means how > >>> to make > >>> the selection of the peers in the wireless environment? > >> > >> the ALTO protocols and procedures feature mechanisms that can be > >> leveraged in a mobile / wireless scenario. IMO there are two issues: > >> > >> 1. When a client is moving between different sections of an access > >> network it may have to find a new ALTO server which is able > >> to give guidance that is useful at the new client position. > >> draft-kiesel-alto-3pdisc-05, sec. 1.3 states: > >> > >> o A change of the IP address at an interface invalidates the result > >> of the ALTO server discovery procedure. For instance, if the IP > >> address assigned to a mobile host changes due to host mobility, > >> it > >> is required to run the ALTO server discovery procedure for the > >> new > >> IP address without relying on earlier gained information. > > > > > > mobility is often at layer-2 and this mean you will need some other > > mechanisms in order to enrich your maps/ecs with wireless-l2 derived > > topology info. > > I agree. But the creation of maps based on the (wireless) topology and > other {cost,distance,performance,...}-related information as well as > feeding them into the ALTO server is out of scope of the protocol spec. > > why does the creation of this map is out of the scope of the protocol spec? the ALTO server should provider the information to client to make sure that P2P application make the appropriated selection for the wireless peer. > The paragraph above is about ALTO server discovery: > > If the client notices that it has been assigned a different IP address, > one reason may be a significant movement in the network, e.g., handover > from one mobility anchor to another, and therefore a new ALTO server > discovery might be required (of course, there might be other reasons for > getting a new IP addres, but doing a new discovery then won't hurt). > > Are there any networks using layer-2 mobility which are so huge, that a > client should discover and use different ALTO servers while moving > around even though it can retain the same IP address? > > Thanks, > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > -- Best wishes, Beijing University of Posts & Telecommunications (BUPT) Zhu Xiao ( 朱潇 ) E-mail: [email protected] mobile:+86 134-8881-9004
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
