James Kempf wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > as i know, there are two 802.11 deployments : with relays APs and with
> integrated AP/AR.
> > thus, i think this proposal(APs cache RAs) can be considered in IETF if
> 802.11 deployments with "integrated AP/AR" is considered. what do you think?
> >
>
> If the AP and AR are integrated, then this proposal is no different than having
> the router send the RA after the MN has done the reassociate and 802.1x, if any.
> Again, a good idea in any case.
>
>
Yes, L2 triggers at the AR is a good idea, but it doesn't solve the
separate AR AP case. Would it help to call the AR an RA proxy ;-)
jak
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
