> Most wireless link protocols that provide robust dormant > mode support have a > separate dormant mode (aka paging) signaling channel that is > extremely > narrowband and requires very low receiver power to monitor. > This channel is > independent of the traffic channel over which IP traffic > goes. Requiring the > terminal to wake up periodically, bring up the traffic > channel for an RA, > then go to sleep again would result in considerably less > power saving than > if the separate dormant mode channel is used.
=> Of course, but it all depends on how often you do this. If we do it every 30 minutes, it's not much of a drain, if we do it every hour it's negligible and so on. Hesham This is why > your laptop can't > really do power efficient dormant mode on its 802.11 > interfaces (802.11 has > no separate dormant mode signaling channel), while your cell > phone regularly > gets something like 30 hours of dormant mode before the > battery runs out > (cellular protocols do have such channels). > > jak > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pars Mutaf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Francis Dupont" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <ipv6@ietf.org> > Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 5:18 AM > Subject: Re: Proposal to change aspects of Neighbor Discovery > > > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 12:37 +0200, Francis Dupont wrote: > >> In your previous mail you wrote: > >> > >> The I-D: > >> draft-madanapalli-ipv6-periodic-rtr-advts-00.txt > >> proposes several changes to ND procedures and parameters. > >> > >> => I strongly object not about the document itself but about its > >> principle because IMHO the link-layer should adapt, not > the network > >> layer. > > > > > > I agree with you of course. But I was thinking of this issue, > > i.e. "how the link layer could adapt?"... It's not that easy. > > > > Ideally, the dormant host's receiver circuit would be > synchronized with > > the router's periodic RAs. The receiver circuit would be > switched ON > > exactly when the RA arrives. But unfortunately, between > the AR and the > > host, there is an access point. The RA messages may be queued and > > delayed at the access point (mixed up with other link > layer frames). > > This queuing delay may foil our dormant mode > synchronization, and the > > host may miss the RA messages :-( > > > > This means that, perfect dormant mode synchronization can > be more easily > > achieved between the host and the access point (i.e. at > the link layer). > > In this case, however, the router's RAs will awaken the > dormant host. > > (unless the L2 access point recognizes the RA packets and > forwards them > > at the right time, i.e. when the host's receiver is ON). > > > > Difficult issue. > > > > Regards! > > pars > > > > > > > >> 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 > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
