Subject: [NetLMM] #159: Application Abort upon PPP Re-establishment

From: "NetLMM" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:31:23 -0000

#159: Application Abort upon PPP Re-establishment
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  Sri Gundavelli <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
     Type:  technical                    |      Status:  new                                                 
 Priority:  major                        |   Milestone:  PMIPv6 base specification                           
Component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6  |    Keywords:                                                      
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Could re-establishment of PPP session upon handover break running
 applications?

 This issue was brought up by Jean-Mickael Guerin on 2007/07/23:

  ''Jean-Mickael Guerin:  As mentioned in the draft the ppp session is torn
 down then re-established. So I would suspect that some application on the
 mobile station could break. Do people have some feedback of their
 implementation for this case?

  ''Sri Gundavelli:  The link that is assumed on the MN-AR link is point to
 point link, PPP is just an example. We need to get some data on this for
 different SDO architectures, how the host handles the handoff scenario for
 this specific case.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://www1.tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/trac/ticket/159>
NetLMM <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/>

_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm

---

From: Ashutosh Dutta <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 07:54:03 -0400

I can share some of our experience with PPP handoff in a lab 
environment. We have not tried netlmm-based solution yet, but we have 
tried PPPoE in an CDMA emulated environment with MIP. We need to bring 
down PPP and bring up the PPP interface again. Our application (we have 
tried with SIP-based application) does not break, but we have 
interruption in traffic due to re-establishment of link and other 
associated handoff related operations.

Thanks
Ashutosh

---

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:15:03 +0300

Hi Ashutosh, all,

these would certainly be interesting results.  The most important thing
is that sessions can survive attachment changes, of course.  But small
handover delays and handover-related packet loss are likewise important,
in particular for a /localized/ mobility management protocol.  This is
not only an issue with PPP re-establishment, but also with signaling
delays between the MAG and various other entities (LMA, policy store,
possibly AAA infrastructure, etc.).  All of these delays should be kept
in mind during the design phase of Proxy MIPv6 and should be avoided as
much as possible.  After all, one important application that Proxy MIPv6
is supposed to facilitate eventually is real-time applications like VoIP.

FWIW, I moved this issue #159 to category "implementation-specific"
since it does not identify a design issue that would have to be solved
in draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6.

Best,
- Christian

---

From: "NetLMM" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:00:41 -0000

#159: Application Abort upon PPP Re-establishment
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |        Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  technical                    |       Status:  new            
 Priority:  normal                       |    Milestone:                 
Component:  implementation-specific      |   Resolution:                 
 Keywords:                               |  
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * cc: [email-masked] (added)
  * owner:  Sri Gundavelli <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] =>
            [email-masked]
  * priority:  major => normal
  * component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6 => implementation-specific
  * milestone:  PMIPv6 base specification =>

Comment:

 Moved this issue to category "implementation-specific" since it does not
 identify a design issue that would have to be solved in draft-ietf-netlmm-
 proxymip6.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://www1.tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/trac/ticket/159#comment:1>
NetLMM <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/>

---

From: Jean-Mickael Guerin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:28:15 +0200

Hi Ashutosh,
> associated handoff related operations.

Thanks very much for the feedback. Do you know if the PPP session is 
restarted so that new link-local is negociated at each down & up ?

Jean-Mickael

---

From: Ashutosh Dutta <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:38:48 -0400

Christian,
           I agree that any netlmm-based protocol (e.g., ProxyMipv6) 
should be validated to make sure that it meets the goals as described in 
RFC 4831. I am sure we should try to cover these design decisions in the 
base protocol as much as possible, but as we move on with the 
implementation and try out the pre-deployment performance results, we 
may find a need for extension, revision etc.

Thanks
Ashutosh

---

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:01:15 +0300

Yes, that's right.

- Christian