RE: CTP Issue 24:Interoperability with other Handover Protocols

Hi,

I agree with James on this issue.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext James Kempf [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 17 September, 2003 20:42
> To: Jukka MJ Manner; Seamoby Working Group
> Subject: Re: [Seamoby] CTP Issue 24:Interoperability with 
> other Handover
> Protocols
> 
> 
> Jukka,
> 
> CTP is not currently intended to be implemented in product 
> deployments. It
> is intended to be an Experimental RFC, for input into the 
> IRTF Mobility
> Research group. One task of this group will be to complete 
> the integration
> of fast handover protocols that has currently been left 
> unfinished in the
> IETF. We've attempted to accomplish this within Seamoby, but 
> the current
> organizational structure - with half the fast handover work 
> being done in
> the Mobile IP group and half in Seamoby - has proven a 
> hinderance to getting
> a well-integrated IP level fast handover protocol. The IRTF Mobility
> Research group won't have that constraint. For that reason, I would
> recommend against trying to achieve the integration in this draft.
> 
> If you are interested in participating in this effort, I'd urge you to
> become involved in the IRTF Mobility Research group. 
> Personally, I'd like to
> see a well-engineered, integrated fast handover protocol with 
> research work
> to back it up come popping out of the ITRF group in a year or 
> two, ready for
> standardization.
> 
>             jak
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jukka MJ Manner" <[email protected]>
> To: "Seamoby Working Group" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:35 AM
> Subject: Re: [Seamoby] CTP Issue 24:Interoperability with 
> other Handover
> Protocols
> 
> 
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This issue is related to my question sent to the list on 
> Friday about not
> > being able to integrate the CTAR message into other 
> handover messages. If
> > adding such possibility would not delay the finishing of 
> the CTP document
> > too much, I would personally like to see that feature 
> available. Then
> > again, I don't currently work for a manufacturer implementing CTP or
> > handover protocols, so maybe people who's work may be affected could
> > comment... John already had some proposed text to have this feature
> > possible.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jukka
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, James Kempf wrote:
> >
> > > CTP currently doesn't specify how it interoperates with 
> other handover
> > > protocols. A better integrated handover mechanism if CTP could be
> > > interoperate with other handover protocols.
> > >
> > > See 
> http://danforsberg.info:8080/draft-ietf-seamoby-ctp/issue24 for
> details.
> > >
> > > Possible resolutions:
> > >
> > > 1) Text proposed in issue24 Web page.
> > > 2) Reject
> > >
> > > Suggested resolution: reject
> > > Justification: The protocol currently is designed to be 
> standalone,
> which is
> > > sufficient for the experimental status. Further work on 
> integrating CTP
> with
> > > other handover protocols should go on within the IRTF's 
> new mobility
> > > research group.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> > >
> > >             jak
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Seamoby mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Seamoby mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Seamoby mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
>