Don't forget to include the IAB/IETF Architecture diagram, it helps people navigate. http://unfix.org/projects/ipv6/IPv6andIPv4.gif
Jim Fleming http://www.IPv8.info IPv16....One Better !! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian E Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hesham Soliman (ERA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "'Hughes John-CJH023'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Margaret Wasserman'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 7:52 AM Subject: Re: draft-wasserman-3gpp-advice-00.txt > It's short-sighted *not* to think of the 3G (or 4G) devices as routers > - we certainly need to recommend an approach for 3G that will also work for 4G > - in 4G, surely we will get a solution in which the cellular terminal will > act as a router for the personal area network > > Just give them each a /64. Anything else is fiddling with details. > > (Also see RFC 3177, section 3) > > Brian > > "Hesham Soliman (ERA)" wrote: > > > > John, > > > > Please see my comment below. > > > > => Actually it seems to me that the solution in the draft > > is a lot simpler than the one in the current 3GPP specs, but > > I might have missed something that concerned you ? > > > > I agree. The solution in the draft is simpler however at the expense of what I >view as being a wasteful implementation. The draft proposes /64 being allocated to each mobile device at a minimum and problably multiple /64s. This would be perfectly acceptable if each mobile device was a mobile router supporting mobile subnets - but in 3GPP that is not the case, a mobile device is a host and in many cases the hosts may have very basic functionalities. > > > > => I understand that it seems wasteful, however, according > > to the calculations in section 7.3.1 of the draft, we > > can afford to trade off the efficiency of address allocation > > for simplicity. > > To my knowledge, nothing in the 3GPP specifications prohibits > > a UE from being a router. Granted that currently, it seems > > that UEs are not heading that way, but why not have a > > mechanism that allows the UE to be a router _if_needed_ > > in future. > > You could probably argue that there might be more efficient > > mechanisms, but when we consider the limitation of not wanting > > to significantly impact the 3GPP specs, this solution > > seems reasonable. > > > > The working group should provide guidance on whether such a solution is something >they are comfortable with being recommended to 3GPP. > > > > => That's what weš're doing now :) > > > > Regards, > > Hesham > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Brian E Carpenter > Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM > On assignment at the IBM Zurich Laboratory, Switzerland > Board Chairman, Internet Society http://www.isoc.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
