Re: Re: phase iii network: v4/v6 addressing & Internet connectivity
Joe Pickert <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.wireless.cu-wireless |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
There are variations on mobile ip designed to avoid the triangular routing issue (dynamic mobile ip for instance), and I am not really suggesting this might be the best mechanism to employ; just one that might be leveraged more or less off-the-shelf to suit your purposes. Joe On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, David Young wrote: > Mobile IP is something for us to look at, but I think that for the amount > of effort it would take to deploy, it might not add a lot of value. > I am concerned about the overhead of "triangle routing." David Chiluk, > one of Ralph Johnson's students, astutely observed that on the assymetric > net connections that we can count on, triangle routing may not only be > wasteful, but practically unusable! > > [BTW, I think that with Mobile IPv6, triangle routing can be avoided. > I think that it has to do w/ identifying TCP sessions using the (EUI64, > port, EUI64, port) tuple instead of the (IPv6, port, IPv6, port) tuple.] > > Dave > > -- > David Young OJC Technologies > [email protected] Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 > > _______________________________________________ > CU-Wireless mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/cu-wireless > Project Page: http://cuwireless.ucimc.org > _______________________________________________ CU-Wireless mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/cu-wireless Project Page: http://cuwireless.ucimc.org