IETF Logo Mail Archive

[MEXT] [dmm?] Surprising assertion about make-before-break handover prevalance

"Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net> Thu, 04 August 2011 20:51 UTC

Return-Path: <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0A021F867F for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:51:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rzzDBXol7EVB for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4260A21F8678 for <mext@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=X0oWMClW1aAcE5TLUbOS3pr6/XI9sv2Myw8owLH6LylZ8VpU/HD91N2770TrjUbw; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [138.111.58.2] (helo=[172.17.96.56]) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>) id 1Qp4tl-0003cj-Gn for mext@ietf.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:52:09 -0400
Message-ID: <4E3B0677.8050705@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 13:52:07 -0700
From: "Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
Organization: Wichorus Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mext <mext@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 137d7d78656ed6919973fd6a8f21c4f2d780f4a490ca6956d5d4673fe7faad86f82972c8ee93e53a4cc36877e980fe90350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 138.111.58.2
Subject: [MEXT] [dmm?] Surprising assertion about make-before-break handover prevalance
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 20:51:55 -0000

Hello folks,

Sorry if this is considered to be imperfectly relevant,
but I'm curious whether or not handovers in the future
would be typically make-before-break.  Or [even "worse"],
in terms of radio interfaces, whether typically wireless
devices in the future will keep multiple radios powered
on all the time.

This might well have an impact on assumptions about
dmm.  It was claimed that, for instance, iPad and iPhone
usually have both interfaces active.  I know that when
I'm using my iPad I do not keep both radios turned on,
but I do not claim to be a typical user, and anyway I
do not have an iPhone.

Comments will be appreciated!

Regards,
Charlie P.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email