Subject: [nemo] Nemo Tree Discovery

From: "Tan, Tat Kin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 16:39:59 +0800

Hello Pascal,

Would like to post some questions to you regarding to "Nested Nemo Tree
Discovery".

I very much agree with a statement at pg4 3.1 where it says "Each level
of a Nemo implies the usage of a new tunnel between the MR and its home
agent. Thus if a MNN connects to a sub-nemo which is also a sub-nemo,
packets from the MNN will be encapsulated three times." I see the
processing overheads here. :-)

When the MRs are chained in tree fashion, say, MR1 as the clusterhead
that connects to a particular AR, MR3 connects to MR2; MR4 connects to
MR3 and so on....., When a MNN that resides in, say MR6 that wish to
communicate, isnt this the same level of encapsulation and routing
overheads introduced when packets traverse via the chain, compared to
the above statement? Of cource the Tree-Balancing method could be
employed to potentially reduce the level of nested routing?

Secondly, what happen if a "branch" of the Tree is broken say, MR4 in
the chain is down? While the restructuring of Tree should be made
transparent, MNNs under MR4 and below simply would loose connections. If
such circumstance is possible, would MR5 (that connects to MR4) declare
"independent" and attempt to connect to other AR that is available and
hence form another sub-tree? How will your proposed Nemo-Tree resolved
routing potential conflicts?

What's your view on these scenarios? :) I may not be right.......

Cheers,
Tatkin