Re: [CARD Techical Issue] Rate limiting flag

James,

As said earlier, the bit makes the protocol flexible without major
additional complexity.
The value of flexibility is worth adding the one-bit flag, I think.
Also I guess the MNs would be need CARD information near handoff in most
cases.
That is, the CARD message traffic would be bursty to individual MN. Setting
a large inter-message time may not be desirable. Also allowing a too short
inter-message time is not desirable, either. So the inter-message time
should be configurable. Then the MN should be informed about the vale which
could be different at different ARs. This brings additional complexity,
which the R flag can make unnecessary.
So I think there are significant advantages with the R flag.

Eunsoo


> > just a quick example of the use of flag bits: ECN-bits with TCP.
> >
>
> Ok, so it sounds as if there is a precedent. But I'm wondering if the case
> here is the same. Wouldn't a host-based mechanism, in which the host is
> required to limit the intermessage time, be simpler?
>
>             jak
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Seamoby mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
>