[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: how mobile do we want to be
On 14-mrt-05, at 16:41, email@example.com wrote:
I think the question is more a recognition that the network is now a
network in motion: systems move and networks move. And while it is
true that some part so the network, doesn't move, or moves very
slowly, an overwhelming amount of the edge is in motion. And I think
it is important to realize that a large number of sessions should
remain viable despite this continuous motion.
Could you provide some examples of applications where a
disconnect/reconnect is sufficiently problematic that MIPv6 or
something similar is warranted?
So far the only stuff I can think of is remote login and streaming
In other words I think the question is not, "how mobile do we want to
be", but how mobile are we and how mobile will we be by the time a
shim6 solution is implemented and widely deployed.
My prediction: not very. 99% of all traffic today is either sessions
that go away within seconds, or can be easily reestablished after a
forced disconnect. I don't see how the other 1% is going to take over
the world any time soon.
It is for these reasons that I am arguing so insistently that we must
include systems and networks in motion (if we want to reserve the term
mobility for MIP4/6 to avoid confusion) as part of the problem space
shim6 must take into account.
I don't think this is a good idea. Let's focus on the basic shim
functionality, and when we have something useful there, we can sync up
with other efforts and see what we need to do to avoid duplication of
effort and to gain synergy.