--- James Kempf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So what are the problems with using RFC 2491 ("IPv6 over Non-Broadcast
> Multiple Access
> (NBMA) networks") for 802.16? If I remember correctly, the solution there was
> to define
> the multicast addresses from RFC 2461 as unicast addresses to the "router".
> Something
> similar could be used for 802.16, with the BS being the target. Or am I
> missing
> something?
I don't think you're missing anything, and NBMA has been mentioned as one
possible way of
doing
things (and if this path is taken, perhaps something similar to RFC 2492 to
specify how
NBMA
would work with 802.16 might be enough).
Others have mentioned the 802.3 convergence sublayer, which reminds me of ATM
LAN
emulation
(others can confirm how analogous these are).
With ATM, there were several ways of doing things, of encapsulating IP
packets, etc. This seems to be true with 802.16 as well. The proposed BoF, I
think, can
help
decide which of the several ways (hopefully only one?) makes sense to
standardize.
-gabriel
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
