Francis, I am not sure I understand your argument that the issue of sending periodic RAs should be handled at the link-layer. If the network layer is going to send the periodic RA, how do you expect the link layer to deal with it? This would break the behavior.
On 8/8/06 4:02 PM, "ext Francis Dupont" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In your previous mail you wrote: > > Are you also proposing that cellular-type protocols, such as 802.16 should > disable their power saving narrowband signaling channels and be forced to > work like 802.11? > > => no, I've said the space where to find a solution is the dormant > mode of the link layer, not the network layer. And about my idea > it is based on the fact the dormant node doesn't need to know what > happens until it wakes up. So if a host expects a periodic RA every 1800 secs, how do you solve the problem? You are saying that the dormant node does not need to know anything until it wakes up, right? But it is only the radio part of the host that is dormant... So you need to deal with such a situation. Your proposal is very vague and I am not sure if it applies. -Raj > BTW the narrowband signaling channel is nice but I am afraid it > works better in a connection oriented context. > > Regards > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
