Folks,
Disclaimer: I have not read through all 800+ messages in the
PILC archive. That will take some time. There are some subjects
of interest to Mobile-IP folks, that is why I cross posted.
I have read through the PILC draft. It suggests many different
proven methods for link layer adaptation to IP. I found errors
of omission rather than of commission. What could be done
is to expand the current draft (or introduce a new draft) that
specifically addresses problems faced by the implementors of
"wireless Internet". This document was very TCP specific and
the wireless world is also concerned about RTP among other
things.
I believe that wireless links are sufficiently different (not
to mention increasingly prevalent) that they deserve their own
set of "standard" link layer adaptation techniques.
I suggest that we (enhance the existing) or prepare a draft that
defines "Canonical Wireless Link Layer Adaptation for IP". In this
draft the important issues of QoS, AAA, and handover could be
addressed in an abstract way, suitable and useable by Wireless LANS
(femto, pico, nano-cellular) and conventional macro-cellular (i.e.
2G, 2.5G, 3G). I am also hoping that the proposed Bluetooth BOF
planned for Pittsburgh could be generalized in scope to include the
more generic notion of "personal area networking" rather than being
just a link adaptation fest for Bluetooth. Other link layers such
as 802.11a, 802.11b, HomeRF, Hyperlan, and Hyperlan2 must be
considered world players as well and the more commonality the
better.
I would also hope that the MWIF contribution could be combined with
a previously proposed BOF for open base station protocols. It is my
hope that the IETF can help unify wireless access by providing
specific link layer hooks that are universal across diverse radio
access networks.
Does this fall into the PILC or Mobile-IP scope or somewhere else?
I am not sure.
Thanks,
Phil QA2757@email.mot.com
847-632-4118
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 09:12:24 EST