Subject: [NEMO] LFN terminology

From: Eranga Perera <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 10:34:33 +1000 (EST)

Hi Thierry,
I need to clarify why is it that the general assumption within the group
is that a LFN has no MIPv6 MN capability. The fact that the LFNs are
'fixed' w.r.t. the MR's topology does not mean that these nodes are fixed
w.r.t to the global topology. So isn't it correct to assume that these
nodes may or may not be MIPv6-enabled?
Thank you,
Eranga

---

From: Thierry Ernst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 12:03:46 +0900

Hi,

> nodes may or may not be MIPv6-enabled?

If MNNs are operating the MN Operation of MIPv6, you would call them
LMNs. The reason behind the definition of the LFN vs VMN vs LMN is that
there are MNNs not who don't have MIPv6 capabilities at all. It helped
fixing the requirements for Basic Support.

I hope this does answer the question.
Thierry

---

From: Thierry Ernst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 12:03:46 +0900

Hi,

---

From: Eranga Perera <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 13:47:27 +1000 (EST)

Hi Thierry,
sorry to bother you again. But don't you think that in that case we need
to redefine the terminology cause IMHO both these types of nodes i.e. LFNs
and LMNs are mobile w.r.t. to the global topology. Shouldn't the term
fixed be used to imply that the node is fixed w.r.t. to the MR and this
has nothing to do with MIPv6 capability.
Possible scenario:
an audio player of a car capable of downloading MP3 files (MIPv6 or MIP
enabled) Would you categorize such a node as a LFN or a LMN ?
Basically what I am trying to humbly point out is that Fixed w.r.t the MR
doesn't  mean that a node can be categorised as MIPv6 incapable.

Thank You,
Eranga

---

From: Eranga Perera <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 13:47:27 +1000 (EST)

Hi Thierry,

Thank You,
Eranga

---

From: Thierry Ernst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 12:52:33 +0900

> doesn't  mean that a node can be categorised as MIPv6 incapable.

I think we already came across this discussion, so please check the archives.

A node that doesn't change its point of attachment is fixed; if it's a
MNN in the context of NEMO, it's a LFN. The LFN is no thing else that a
standard IPv6 node, but in order to avoid saying "the fixed node located
in the mobile network", we use the term LFN.

On the other hand, a mobile node is a node that change its point of
attachment. If this is operated by using mobile-IPv6, it's a
MIPv6-enabled mobile node. If it's operated by NEMO Basic Support, it's
a NEMO-enabled mobile node; it's it's by operating ad-hoc protocol AODV
it's an AODV-enabled mobile node.  If this node is located in the mobile
network, it could either be a VMN or a LFN.

Thierry.

-- 

Thierry Ernst, WIDE at Keio University, Japan
E-mail: [email-masked]
Web: http://www.sfc.wide.ad.jp/~ernst/
--
Jun Murai Lab
Keio University K-square Town Campus
1488-8 Ogura, Saiwai-ku, Kawasaki
Kanagawa, 212-0054 Japan
Phone : +81-44-580-1600
Fax   : +81-44-580-1437
Mobile: 090-9815-8023

---

From: Thierry Ernst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 12:52:33 +0900

Thierry.

--

---

From: "T.J. Kniveton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:28:53 -0700

> doesn't  mean that a node can be categorised as MIPv6 incapable.

Forget about NEMO for a second. If a node uses Mobile IPv6, it is a mobile
node. If it is on its home network, call it a local mobile node. If it is
visiting from another network and is using a CoA, it's a visiting mobile
node.

If the node is at home and doesn't use mobile IPv6 (whether it is capable to
or not), it is a local fixed node.

Now, let the MR pick up the network's root point of attachment and move it
around. The nodes on that network remain LMNs, VMNs, and LFNs as they were
before. This identity is relative to the network, and hence relative to the
MR. In NEMO basic support, the nodes need not know they are on a mobile
network at all.

TJ

---

From: "T.J. Kniveton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:28:53 -0700

TJ

---

From: Eranga Perera <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:45:12 +1000 (EST)

Hi guys,

Thank you for clarifying this issue.

Regards,
Eranga

---

From: Eranga Perera <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:45:12 +1000 (EST)

Hi guys,

Regards,
Eranga