On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:34:59AM -0400, Bound, Jim wrote: > From: Nick 'Sharkey' Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Bound, Jim wrote: > > > > > > None of us working on this are even clear layer 3 handover will ever > > > work? Not sure if that matters does it? Are we talking about the > > > future? > > > We're pretty clear on this: we've tested it. > > Have you tested hmipv6 to the scale that mobility operator working with > ISPs can cover the entire metropolis of L.A.?
To clarify: we've been doing some work to identify and isolate the causes of L3 handover delays, and they each seem solvable by one means or another. For example, hmipv6 offers one possible way of eliminating the RTT delay caused by sending BUs. In its current form, it probably isn't scalable to that level, but sadly I don't have a megapolis to test it with -- I'm a research engineer not a product engineer :-) Actually, JinHyeock reminded me that I'd forgotten to mention the Movement Detection Delay ... we've been tackling that with inter-layer signalling to prompt router solicitations. > No one has deployed layer 3 in production environment I am aware of? > Nor would I trust it yet simply because of this mail discussion. Ummm ... I hope it isn't my Optimism which has caused your concerns ... although if you've got technical comments or concerns re: my draft I'd love to hear them. It is, after all, a work in progress. The Optimistic DAD thing comes about because I thought the FH stuff was getting a bit theoretical and I felt that a set of small, easily implemented patches, one per cause of L3 handover delay, would be a good way to move forward in the short term. cheers, -----Nick -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
