> > => Why not? I think it is scalable to that level simply > > because you can plug more anchor points as you see > > fit. it's as scalable as HAs are in MIPv6. > > My main concern would be issues to do with the MAP information > propagation, and the MAP selection algorithm ... I think there's > some common ground between the tactics of HMIP and the FMIP > three-party-handover and I suspect the best solution is in that > region somewhere ...
=> I guess, w're on the wrong list for this discussion. But I don't understand your concern about "propagation". In Jim's case, you're not likely to use Dynamic MAP discovery. The most likely way is manual configuration of ARs. > > => What you're doing (optimistic DAD) can be combined > > with Fast Handovers to completely eliminate movement > > detection delay. [...] > > => My very initial effort (with Karim) with Fast > handovers was aimed > > at: anticipation + optimistic DAD + HMIPv6. > > It's tricky getting anticipation signalling out of most 802.11 > drivers, but we've had success getting L2 to signal L3 that it has > just reassociated, causing L3 to RS. Greg Daley has more information > here, I'm sure he'll chip in when he gets back to town ... => Anticipation is not bound to 802.11, it can also happen on the network side in other link layers. I agree that it is not supported by all cards as you guys keep telling me :) 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------