Re: [Mip4] RE: Differences between Low Latency Handovers and FMIP v4

[Henrik Levkowetz <henrik at levkowetz.com>]

Hi Karim,

    Just one point here -

on 2005-03-22 8:14 pm Karim El-Malki (AL/EAB) said the following:
> I agree with what you are saying regarding L2 triggers and
> deployment. However I have a comment on the technical
> argument and the FMIP/LLH discussion. The issue is not
> whether FMIP is superior to LLH or viceversa. My argument
> is that they are basically the same thing and use the same
> set of messages between MN and FA: proxy router solicitation,
> proxy router advertisement, registration request/FBU.
> I can't see how one can be better than the other. I'm also
> not surprised since FMIPv4 is a v6-ification on FMIPv6 while
> FMIPv6 and LLH specs were made similar in the first place.

No, the similarity is not surprising, and more importantly, we're
not saying one is inherently better than the other.  If that was
the case, there would be no sense in having both head for
experimental.

Quite to the contrary, we should hope to gain experience with both,
to increase our understanding and work towards something which
may later be standardised.


	Henrik


-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/