Subject: RE: [nemo] Re: is global HAHA so complex?

From: "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:51:44 +0200

>> <snip a lot of good arguments>
>>
>>> Anyway, i still argue that we need to flesh out the requirements
that
>>> gloablly moving networks have in order to figure out which solution
>>> are
>>> best suited for them
>>
>> Yes.  That's it exactly.  If we don't have a clear picture of the
>> potential
>> users,
>
>after all this long thread, i think that the case of globally moving
>networks on board of airplanes or other transportation mechanisms are a
>use case for which there is interest and that we could try to work on a
>solution for that.
>
[Pascal] Yes, this is already in the NEMO requirements :) 

" #  Networks of sensors and computers deployed in vehicles: vehicles
are increasingly embedded with a number of processing units for safety
and ease of driving reasons, as advocated by ITS (Intelligent
Transportation Systems) applications ([9], CALM - Medium and Long Range,
High Speed, Air Interfaces parameters and protocols for broadcast, point
to point, vehicle to vehicle, and vehicle to point communication in the
ITS sector - Networking Protocol - Complementary Element, February
2005., [8]Ernst, T. and K. Uehara, Connecting Automobiles to the
Internet, November 2002.).

# Access networks deployed in public transportation (buses, trains,
taxis, aircrafts): they provide Internet access to IP devices carried by
passengers: laptop, camera, mobile phone: host mobility within network
mobility or PANs: network mobility within network mobility, i.e. nested
mobility (see [4]Ernst, T. and H. Lach, Network Mobility Support
Terminology, February 2005. for the definition of nested mobility).
"

But we can move forward and detail more if you wish.

Note that for devices like cars, they expect to rely on cheap common
devices such as 4G phones with some application capability built in
(like JAVA or .net). As a result, you can not do most of the vehicules
if you do not include 4G phones...

Pascal

---

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:21:58 +0300

> Terminology, February 2005. for the definition of nested mobility).

right we knew since the begining that the networks in planes and cars 
are a clear target for nemo protocol.
The question is what are the specific requiremetns of globally moving 
networks located in planes that they need a specific RO mechanism like 
gloabl HAHA that cannot be addressed by a general RO mechanism for 
nemo?

Regards, marcelo