Subject: RE: [nemo] comments on solution space analysis part in taxonomy draft

From: "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:40:32 +0100

> 
> I don't like the term "pinball routing" I like it better
"multi-angular"
> routing.  If you know of a reference to prior use of this term
"pinball
> routing" please let me know.
Try:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22pinball+routing%22&btnG=Google+S
earch 

> 
> Section 2.3: "When a MIPv6 mn joins a mobile network it becomes a
VMN".
>   I think it is also valid to say "When a MIPv6 mn joins a mobile
network
> it becomes a LMN".  The VMN and LMN terms offer no useful distinction
> here.  BEtter use MH or MR or MN, it is sufficient to my reading.
I think it's just the definition... 

> 
> Section 3.2 Infrastructure Optimization fails to mention BGP.  But it
> does mention HAHA as a potential Infrastructure Optimization (to my
> understanding, HAHA is _not_ known to work even on paper, so why
> mentioning it at all).
Do you mean that mobility should interfere with BGP in the infra

> What are "Mobile Routers forming a fleet"?
It might be useful to distinguish swarming movement and solid movement. 
A fleet moves mostly as a solid, with little inner (relative) movement.

> 
> "Possible nodes that are required to be changed include: ..." why does
> the list include VMN and not include LMN?  Isn't it because there is
no
> clear distinction between LMN and VMN?  So again better just use MH,
MR
> or MN.
> 
> So in section 4.2.2 Infrastructure Optimization, if we do this, we
need
> a method to Discover Correspondent Routers, right?  Do you know of
such
> a method?
Right, it's one of the problems to be solved, so it's listed.
ORC proposes a solution. There should be others, hopefully. 

Pascal

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:54:35 +0100

> Do you mean that mobility should interfere with BGP in the infra

I don't mean that BGP should interfere with mobility.  I don't comment 
on a kind of solution or what should be done.  I just mean that optimal 
paths can be obtained by injecting routes (and not use Mobile IP).  I 
also mean that using routes directly can not scale to the size of the 
bigger Internet, but can work ok within small domains.

I also refer to a BGP for NEMO presentation which I've seen slides on 
the web and to which I've already sent an URL.  And also refer to some 
BGP discussion that happened here earlier.

Alex