Hi Antony: The last part of PS-5, does the sentence " Network resources are also wasted when the via routes are set up for many MNs that do not require IP mobility support." implicitly indicate the scenario which similar with MIP/PMIP? When I read this sentence, the MIP/PMIP tunnel appears in my mind, and yes, if MNs do not require IP mobiliy support, the MIP/PMIP tunnel will waste network resources.
Cheers. h chan <[email protected]> 发件人: [email protected] 2012/05/08 01:58 收件人 "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 抄送 主题 [DMM] draft requirement REQ-2: Transparency to Upper Layers REQ-2: Transparency to Upper Layers The DMM solutions SHALL enable transparency above the IP layer. Such transparency is needed for the application flows that cannot cope with a change of IP address and when mobile hosts or entire mobile networks change their point of attachment to the Internet, but SHOULD NOT be taken as the default behavior. REQ-2M (Motivation for REQ-2) The goal of this requirement is to enable more efficient use of network resources and more efficient routing by not invoking mobility support when there is no such need. RELEVANT problem: PS5: Wasting resources to support mobile nodes not needing mobility support IP mobility support is not always required. For example, some applications do not need a stable IP address during handover, i.e. IP session continuity. Sometimes, the entire application session runs while the terminal does not change the point of attachment. In these situations that do not require IP mobility support, network resources are wasted when mobility context is set up. Network resources are also wasted when the via routes are set up for many MNs that do not require IP mobility support. OTHER related problem O-PS1: Mobility signaling overhead with peer-to-peer communication While mobility management enables a mobile host to be reachable, the hosts may then communicate directly so that the mobility support is no longer needed. Taking the need of mobility support as the default behavior will waste network resources. O-PS2: Lack of user-centricity Centralized deployment compared with distributed mobility management may be less capable to support user-centricity. Example in the lack of user-centricity is to provide mobility support to all mobile nodes by default regardless of whether the user needs it or not. (The above has been drafted with contributions, inputs and discussions from various people. Additional contributions and comments are most welcome.) H Anthony Chan _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
