Re: RE: AD request / L2 Triggers Chapter Statement
=?ks_c_5601-1987?B?wMzB9sjG?= <[email protected]> Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:26:44 +0900
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.pilc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Up to now, IP over any link layer scheme has been providing many problems and solutions (e.g., in IP over ATM, ¡°classical IP over ATM¡±, MPLS). From the view of network performance, I think that what the responsibility for any solutions are delegated to higher layers (eg., wireless TCP) and link layer (in IP over ATM, ATM), is to set limits by itself to the interworking with some link layers. Similar problems happen in TCP over Wireless environments. If some modifications happen in only host or access router, isn¡¯t it possible to settle the problems? Needless to say, all what I say is to set ¡®secure L2 trigger¡¯ forth as a premise. Moreover, if IP protocol (RFC791) is not modified, I think L2 trigger is worthy of considering as one solution to IP over any Wireless. by Jihoon Lee _______________________________________________ pilc mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pilc http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pilc-charter.html http://pilc.grc.nasa.gov/