> On 25 Feb 2015, at 16:58, Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 25, 2015, at 10:47 AM, Ray Hunter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> One suggestion from my side for handling WiFi roaming is for these clients 
>> to incorporate a software loopback interface that does not renumber, and is 
>> always up, and these roaming clients also actively take part in HNCP, and 
>> the Homenet routing protocol as "stub routers."
> 
> Something like this is currently done with Babel, but it's not a complete 
> solution because it requires Babel-specific modifications on the client.   
> The proposal to have a single bridged WiFi broadcast domain would eliminate 
> this problem, at the cost of some substantial pain in terms of how to set 
> that up automatically and in terms of performance, which clearly would suffer 
> from the expanded broadcast domain.   And there's also the problem of 
> differentiating backbone wifi links from wifi leaf networks.

Agreed.

For the purposes of this discussion, I think a soft requirement on a stub-only 
implementation of the chosen Homenet routing protocol on a host OS could be an 
interesting differentiator.
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to