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

[Sri Gundavelli <[e-mail]>]

On 8/4/11 8:31 PM, "Hesham Soliman" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 
>
>> 
>> After all the standardization around MCoA/IFOM, building all the
>> hype/coolness around driving one flow on path and another the other path,
>> its sad to note that we simply don't have the devices/or the battery
>> technology that can keep multiple radios up at the same time for a
>> reasonable length of time (except few exceptions).
> 
> 
> => This is not about MCoA or flow mobility. Of course we have the ability
> to have multiple interfaces up and many of us use it everyday. I assumed
> Charlie's question was not about this trivial case, which we all know
> exists, but rather about a single technology doing make before break
> handovers. I know of only one radio technology that did that in real
> deployments (OFDM).
> 
> Hesham

Yes, we slightly digressed from Charlie's original point. But, on keeping
multiple radios up, the point that Raj touched on, sure, we can keep all the
radios up, but with the charger wired on, in practical terms. All I know is,
if I keep my WLAN interface up on my Droid X, I need a much sooner recharge.
I also know, most terminals are configured to USE only one radio up for
whatever reasons. But, I Ack, there may be some terminals which may be using
both the interfaces, ignoring their SAS awareness ..etc...

Any case, glad to hear your comments/disagreements. We need some life into
these all dead IETF mailing lists :) ...




Sri