RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
The way Mobile IP has addressed this
issue is to use extensions to ICMP router advertisements to allow a mobile
node that has attached to a network determine if it is on the same subnet
from where it just came, or if it is now on a new (sub)net and needs to
acquire a new local IP address. Of course this assumes the node has
already attached whereas the beacon approach (for wireless medium) allows
the node to be a little more selective.
regards,
Frank Ciotti
Apacheta Corp.
> Hi Sungjin and all,
>
> I think this kind of network discovery problem is an important issue
that
> should be studied in .21. But regarding the proposed solution, I am
a bit
> curious about the use of beacons. Is it meant only for the wireless
networks
> with the beacon concepts? How about other networks, e.g. 802.3, which
has no
> beacon to use? Would .21 also address them?
>
> My understanding of Stephen's suggestions is that the .21 may look
at the
> issue at a generic way, and provide a high level guideline. Then the
> implementation or realization of these guidelines have be done in
individual
> WGs', e.g. .11, .16, etc.
>
> Cheers
>
> Cheng Hong
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> > [mailto:owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Sungjin
Lee
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 8:48 AM
> > To: 'S. Daniel Park'; 'McCann, Stephen'; 'stds-802-21'
> > Cc: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM; 'Pyungsoo Kim'
> > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
> >
> >
> > Hi Daniel, Stephen and all HO guys
> >
> > In my understanding, that kind of issue (e.g. ARID into
> > beacon) is fit to be discussed within 802.21. The ARID
> > formant, recommended usage examples and scenarios also could
> > be discussed and then put into the documentation released as
> > 802.21 spec. based on agreement between 802.21 attendees.
> >
> > However, the specific way to provide that ARID information
> > over the air interface should be discussed within each WG. In
> > fact, It sould be discussed within 802.11 WG to propose the
> > changed Beacon frame structure including ARID and within
> > 802.16 to propose the changed DL-MAP or NBR-ADV message
> > including ARID.
> >
> > Let me know if I misunderstanding something from the
> > Stephen's comments
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Sungjin Lee
> > =====================================
> > Global Standards & Research Team
> > Telecommunication R&D Center
> > SAMSUNG Electronics
> >
> > TEL : +82 31 279 5248
> > MOBILE : +82 16 301 6603
> > E-mail : steve.lee@samsung.com ======================================
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> > [mailto:owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of S.
> > Daniel Park
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 8:38 AM
> > To: 'McCann, Stephen'; 'stds-802-21'
> > Cc: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM; 'S. Daniel Park'; 'Pyungsoo Kim'
> > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
> >
> > Stephen, thanks your kindly comments on this work.
> >
> > I agree what you said, this solution can be applied for
> > several wireless environments and I really hope it will be
> > expanded to related WG as you stated 802.11 WIEN SG.
> >
> > I am deeply considering what approach is more general as
> > 802.21 guys indicated and also waiting for various
> > comments/feedbacks on this work.
> >
> > > However, the way that this information is communicated,
be
> > that over a
> > > 802.11, 802.16, other air interface will be technology specific
and
> > > should really be discussed within the WG in charge of standardising
> > > that technology.
> >
> > Regarding this comment, could you explain it more detail ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > - Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
> > - Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: McCann, Stephen [mailto:stephen.mccann@roke.co.uk]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:36 AM
> > > To: 'S. Daniel Park'; 'stds-802-21'
> > > Cc: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM
> > > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting
- ARID
> > >
> > >
> > > Daniel,
> > > This is a very interesting issue, and
I think it may be
> > > applicable to more than one WG.
> > >
> > > The information that you would want to make available at
> > the APs (e.g.
> > > the ARID) is something that would seem to fit within the
scope of
> > > 802.21, where the benefits of having a generic identifier
> > that can be
> > > used over different technologies to support this L2/L3 handover
> > > distinction and what format this information should take
can be
> > > discussed.
> > >
> > > However, the way that this information is communicated,
be
> > that over a
> > > 802.11, 802.16, other air interface will be technology specific
and
> > > should really be discussed within the WG in charge of standardising
> > > that technology.
> > >
> > > Within 802.11 this issue would be welcome within 802.11
WIEN SG.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > > Stephen
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: S. Daniel Park [mailto:soohong.park@SAMSUNG.COM]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 11:50 AM
> > > > To: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM; 'stds-802-21'
> > > > Cc: 'S. Daniel Park'
> > > > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting
- ARID
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi all
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At the previous meeting on March, I presented one issue
> > which dealt
> > > > with unclear handover indication between L2 and L3
and
> > this solution
> > > > defined a new ARID (Access Router ID) into the beacon
to
> > distinguish
> > > > L2 handover from L3 handover. If different ARID, it
means subnet
> > > > change, then L3 handover is performed.
> > > >
> > > > The subject was as below:
> > > > Awareness of the handover to be distinguished from
a L2 or L3.
> > > >
> > > > I remember that chair and some guys required more general
> > solution
> > > > to solve this problem in the 802.11 and they worried
> > about the newly
> > > > defined value into the current 802.11 beacon, however
I am still
> > > > wondering how we can solve this ambiguous operation
> > without 802.11
> > > > spec. extension like ARID or similar value.
> > > >
> > > > So I am open to listen some comments/views on this
issue.
> > > >
> > > > My major question is that
> > > > [1] Do I have to propose this solution to the 802.11
WG
> > since this
> > > > problem is originated from the 802.11 spec. ?
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > [2] Is this 802.21 WG is right place to deat with this
issue ?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > - Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
> > > > - Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Visit our website at www.roke.co.uk
> > >
> > > Registered Office: Roke Manor Research Ltd, Siemens House,
Oldbury,
> > > Bracknell, Berkshire. RG12 8FZ
> > >
> > > The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments
is
> > > confidential to Roke Manor Research Ltd and must not be
> > passed to any
> > > third party without permission. This communication is for
> > information
> > > only and shall not create or change any contractual relationship.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >