Alex
I was just talking about the host mobility side of
things. The requirements say that the routing system
need not address host-mobility because mobile-ip seems
to adequately cover it (if we're wrong, we'd like to
know -- hence my note :-)
As to network mobility (where, loosely, we can assume a
1:1 relationship between networks and IP prefixes), it
seems to me that if the network moves, then its prefix
"appears someplace else" in the topology. That seems to
be "routing" to me. Hence the requirement that the
architecture be able to cope with it. Now there might be
a whole lot of ways to deal with it, maybe as a part of
the routing protocols, maybe as a separate protocol, maybe as something I
haven't thought of.
Frank Kastenholz
At 11:25 AM 4/10/02 -0700, Alex Zinin wrote:
>Frank,
>
> My concern here is _requiring_ a _routing_ architecture to
> address mobility.
>
>Alex
>
>Wednesday, April 10, 2002, 10:34:14 AM, Kastenholz, Frank wrote:
>
>> Is mobile IP inadequate for host mobility, and if so,
>> how?
>
>> Inadequate is not the same thing as inelegant.
>
>> Frank Kastenholz
==================================================
My preferrred signature is:
This information is for the sole use of
whoever receives it and may contain confusing,
enlightening, enraging, entertaining,
irritating, or just plain stupid information,
including without limitation, double-secret-
probation information belonging to [CENSORED
BY THE NSA/FBI/MOUSE]. Any unauthorized review,
use, disclosure, or distribution outside of an
establishment serving alchohol is prohibited on
days that do not end in Y.
But our ******'d lawyers would rather have:
=======================================
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information, including without
limitation, Confidential and/or Proprietary Information belonging to
Unisphere Networks, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
message.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT