Ran, Dino, > % Since it seems the benefits of a host-based scheme is only for > % mobility, ... > > The above assertion isn't obvious and isn't what I thought Jari said... > Right. Clearly one of the benefits of a host-based scheme is that it might be capable of handling host based mobility as well. Likewise, a router based approach might be capable of handling network & mobile network type mobility. Be that as it may, again I'm not sure that matters so much at this stage.
There may be other advantages (and issues) in host based schemes. > Since it seems the benefits of a host-based scheme is only for > mobility, are you conjecturing a host-based scheme is not necessary? I would not make this conclusion. Lets see the proposals and see how they compare in terms of some of the other properties... the ones that I consider important, like deployability or effects to the rest of the Internet. (However, my personal default assumption is a router-based scheme, because I think it will be more deployable. I am willing to be convinced otherwise, however. I'm reading Ran's proposal at the moment, for instance...) Jari -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
