> Op 26 feb. 2015, om 13:56 heeft Mark Townsley <[email protected]> het > volgende geschreven: > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Teco Boot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Op 25 feb. 2015, om 22:00 heeft Mark Townsley <[email protected]> het > > volgende geschreven: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Feb 25, 2015, at 9:50 PM, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Ray Hunter <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> I agree that WiFi roaming is a problem that needs addressing in > >>> Homenet. > >> > >> Yes, but can we rule it out of scope for now? > > > > Yes, we can. > > > > I think the WG needs to focus on securing success before taking on wild > > success at this moment in time. > > When performance in dual stack networks with multiple WiFi AP's in homes > suffers from homenet protocols, this WG produces dead protocols. > > Why would homenet cause wifi APs to suffer more than they do today? Worst > case, wifi remains a single bridged dual-stack LAN. Best case, routing is > possible and hosts are resilient to IP address changes. Somewhere in between > HNCP helps with auto-configuration in one way or another. I don't see how the > status quo path we are without Homenet can be worse with Homenet (separating > out here whatever overhead of getting homenet itself deployed).
Today's WiFi stacks typically prefer staying on connected SSID, until the link is really bad and breaks. Then the alternative SSID is selected, IP address is flushed and a new IP address is requested. This takes time. Connections break. Staying on the same SSID has advantages: IP address survives handover so connections continue to work. Also smarter handover can take place, this eliminates the bad link. So my opinion is that the homenet protocols shall be able to support a layer-2 backbone over a wired backbone connecting a set of access points. Or provide an alternative that works well over a layer-3 backbone. I'm all ears. Teco > > I am more hopeful. I hope we can enable 802.11 fast handover by distributing > the required info. Still open question how to route or bridge over the wired > backbone. > > certainly do not want to inhibit your hope in anyway. Indeed, history shows > that we successful protocols are often deployed in ways the designers do not > expect. Just trying to nudge the group towards a bit more focus in order to > ship sooner rather than later. > > - Mark > > > Teco > > > > > > - Mark > > > >> > >> Can we agree that it's not strictly a routing problem, and that the set of > >> solutions that we are considering could be used, and that we could also > >> explain how to do something like automatically setup capwap using HNCP for > >> discovery, but that we don't have the head-of-queue block on this item for > >> now? > >> > >> -- > >> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works > >> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> homenet mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
