Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mobileip-qos-requirements-01.txt

From: "Hemant Chaskar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:25:22

Hi Xiaoming:

All the requirements in this draft are those imposed by MIP. The 
wireless-link requirement is included there because practically all the 
deployment of MIP will be for nodes connected by wireless links to the 
Internet.

There is one problem moving this requirement to heterogeneity section. It is 
that the heterogeneity of wireless link layers is more or less transparent 
to IP layer. The heterogeneity section contains the requirements imposed due 
to heterogeneity at IP-layer such as different IP-QoS mechanisms.

Hemant

>From: Xiaoming Fu <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] I-D 
>ACTION:draft-ietf-mobileip-qos-requirements-01.txt
>Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:30:44 +0200
>
>Hi Hemant,
>
>Nice to see the new version. One comment:
>
> > 3.3.2. Interactions with link-layer support for QoS...
>It's a problem imposeded by the wireless link (other than MIP itself)
>as I understand. How about treating it as one of the hereterious
>cases and moving to 3.2.2?
>
>Xiaoming

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

---

From: Xiaoming Fu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:31:20 +0200

Hi Hemant,
> deployment of MIP will be for nodes connected by wireless links to the
Yes, it'll result in the characteristics difference for wireless links
during handoffs. However IMO a IP-QoS mechanism itself should take such
a 
link (wireless) into consideration - if we want to include such link 
characteristics in any QoS solution. The difficulty might lie when there 
are no such parameters (e.g., MN in wired link) before handoff while 
after handoff such parameters are introduced in the new path.

> to heterogeneity at IP-layer such as different IP-QoS mechanisms.
I agree current description 3.2.2 only concerns with difference of
various 
IP-layer QoS mechanisms, but could we extend it a broader way? 

BTW, the quoted "(best current practices)" in 3.2.2 seems unclear to me.
Does it mean "or BCPs" or "from BCPs"?

Cheers,
Xiaoming