Re: [homenet] New Version Notification for draft-barth-homenet-wifi-roaming-00.txt

Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Mon, 30 November 2015 14:18 UTC

Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27F3D1ACDDF for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 06:18:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8_RFqpnzR_AV for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 06:18:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ob0-x236.google.com (mail-ob0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B50701ACDE5 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 06:18:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by obbww6 with SMTP id ww6so127687987obb.0 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 06:18:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=82K+slEDQWDgmNhmdbJ7nexSzJagcvFo7dWlZqBN0o0=; b=xXql6L19kLpk4x61ur7/zTJDNHvpCmz5B4C5BCpKyRUq0q2PC4kOTFlK3A5HQpILGX iiaJ2fuYycoFXJBzSiUL6PgtRhTijHBV186vJgEYclopdNW0G85CyJXdfa39IAlu5ZwB ZiDqTHVx6Q6COCfQRlUiRobQg/dgt4kVHckuWvgaYQAdrXjTOc4MZ/hDKbZo2f6l7/92 zUhZ5XUpQxVjh4fmv0cYSnqNrJk+78MLXSnTDWyS54RO+ip66JYsoEbGoACRgSmrZYTO 4afZ8bPwf1yUvNIi7inE9UA05kC1q/PYD8JmjsJePZlW56mW/Z2WcmFv+r+R20Ye4yTJ 9X2A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.233.103 with SMTP id tv7mr46463704oec.69.1448893096118; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 06:18:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.202.187.3 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 06:18:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1511301501100.24520@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <20151016113242.29159.37112.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5620E158.4000309@openwrt.org> <56265237.8020202@gmail.com> <56571260.6040504@globis.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1511261610310.24520@uplift.swm.pp.se> <56572539.8080802@mtcc.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1511301438500.24520@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAA93jw5A-uLza2hRLkM7UnZQeMRwz069o4sb6GAx=hJgLj8i0A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1511301501100.24520@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:18:16 +0100
Message-ID: <CAA93jw604U+WYhEgFw4PAY4VeBSDb0dvz=5Bzc+3VWcTF3sT1g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/LP_NZ7HjMyoJAz15sFtivjxzA6M>
Cc: HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [homenet] New Version Notification for draft-barth-homenet-wifi-roaming-00.txt
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:18:18 -0000

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
>
>> Well, in the two or more radio (2.4 and 5ghz) case, you can easily roam
>> between the two radios with many chipsets. Some chipsets only allow one
>> active radio at a time, however.
>
>
> Does this actually work in real life? Considering the solutions I found

Using linux, with ath9k gear, worked for 7 years. On nearly everything
else, rare.

> doing my quick search, it seems the AP vendors are implementing all kinds of
> solutions to trick the client that it's just one single large network with a
> single AP, even though it's a lot of them.
>
> For instance:
> https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/205144590-UniFi-What-is-Zero-Handoff-

yes, it's a mess.

It's even worse than that...

>
> So while I would prefer a solution in the end with make-before-break and
> seamless handover without breaking the IP layer at all, this seems to
> involve quite a lot of new functionality both from the Network (which is
> doable) and from the client (also doable, but a lot harder, especially
> within current charter).

I would not mind at all if the ietf had a wg with the ieee and the
wifi alliance and whoever else might care, to make wifi better in a
huge variety of ways.

I remain perpetually astonished that a technology beloved by and used
by billions (with billions to come) has so few advocates, so few
working on actual interoperability, so many bad implementations, and
so little research funding.

the general public has their priorities straight:

https://www.google.se/search?q=image+hierarchy+of+needs+wifi&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi32M36qbjJAhWEqnIKHSseCiMQ_AUIBygB&biw=1135&bih=1072

For those that haven't seen it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb-UnHDw02o

I am happy that a little bit of funding towards merely getting per
station queuing working looks to arrive next year.

Tackling handoff in any sane way with the current mess, looks harder.