Hesham,
I wasn't proposing that they be coupled. I see the two as complimentary.
jak
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hesham Soliman (EAB)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'James Kempf'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Bound, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
"Thomas Narten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 3:59 AM
Subject: RE: Changing RS Reply Timing for Mobile IPv6
>
> > I think what I've been hearing from Jim Bound and others
> > that they would rather
> > not have these specialized features that FMIPv6 is
> > specifying as general purpose
> > for any IPv6 router, because they want to move forward with
> > their IPv6
> > (including base MIPv6 which works with any IPv6 router)
> > product plans. I would
> > argue that the oDAD and FastRA are in the same category.
>
> => I would strongly suggest that we decouple Fast RA and
> even oDAD from Fast handovers. These proposals will make
> MIPv6 handovers faster, independently of FMIPv6. So please
> consider them in isolation. This way we will also have
> the benefit of moving them forward ASAP and not waiting
> for FMIPv6.
>
> Hesham
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
