Re: [Mobopts] Same MPA server for 2 access networks

Carlos Rodrigues <cmjr@iol.pt> Mon, 20 April 2009 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <cmjr@iol.pt>
X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC323A68D8 for <mobopts@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.717
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.717 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.320, BAYES_50=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iXwDgvBXX1rd for <mobopts@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bld10.srv.portugalmail.net (bld10.srv.portugalmail.net [195.170.168.137]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27613A67D4 for <mobopts@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:38:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.1.0.10]) by bld10.srv.portugalmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D78324838A for <mobopts@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:39:49 +0100 (WEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at srv.portugalmail.net
Received: from bld6.srv.portugalmail.net ([10.1.0.6]) by localhost (bld10.srv.portugalmail.net [10.1.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pVIqZRrEwpU0 for <mobopts@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:39:49 +0100 (WEST)
Received: by bld6.srv.portugalmail.net (Postfix, from userid 30) id 421FE302DD6; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:39:47 +0100 (WEST)
Received: from warrior1.ipleiria.pt (warrior1.ipleiria.pt [193.137.239.251]) by webmail.iol.pt (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:39:47 +0100
Message-ID: <20090420183947.cvdzbx7f4ccok4wg@webmail.iol.pt>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:39:47 +0100
From: Carlos Rodrigues <cmjr@iol.pt>
To: mobopts@irtf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.2-cvs)
Subject: Re: [Mobopts] Same MPA server for 2 access networks
X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobility Optimizations <mobopts.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts>, <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/mobopts>
List-Post: <mailto:mobopts@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts>, <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:38:53 -0000

These agents need to stay with access network but I can have a  
centralized MPA server in the edge of IMS core, no?

It is like DNS... we don't have several DNS servers to access to the  
Internet. It is done relay...

Cheers,
Carlos Rodrigues (Computer Science BSc student)
ESTG - IPL
Leiria, Portugal

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ashutosh Dutta" <adutta@research.telcordia.com>
To: "Carlos Rodrigues" <cmjr@iol.pt>
Cc: <mobopts@irtf.org>
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Mobopts] Same MPA server for 2 access networks


> Carlos,
>         Let me repeat some of what I have said earlier to you.
> MPA server has several logical components, such as Authentication  
> Agent, Configuration Agent, Buffering Agent, Tunneling agent. Some  
> of these components could be aggregated for each access network,  
> such as Authentication Agent, and Configuration Agent. However, part  
> of Configuration Agent needs to stay with each access network (e.g.,  
> DHCP relay). Buffering Agent and Tunneling Agent usually stay at the  
> edges with each access network.
>
> Thus, it is a design decision as to how you want to split the  
> functionality of the MPA server.
>
> Thanks
> Ashutosh
>
>
> Carlos Rodrigues wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> I have question about the number of MPA servers necessary in a  
>> interworking scenario.
>> If I have a scenario with 2 access networks (with different  
>> technologies), will need two CA, two AA and two tunneling agents  
>> and buffering agents if perform handover from both ways (A to B and  
>> B to A), right?
>>
>> First, I'm trying understand why (can give some tips?);
>> Second, it's not possible aggregate these 2 MPA server in a single  
>> entity? In a intra domain scenario makes sense.
>>
>> All help or support will be very helpful.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Carlos Rodrigues (Computer Science BSc student)
>> ESTG - IPL
>> Leiria, Portugal
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________________________ Descubra as Soluções de Financiamento  
>> Cetelem.
>> Saiba mais em: http://www.iol.pt/correio/rodape.php?dst=0901272
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mobopts mailing list
>> Mobopts@irtf.org
>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts
>

________________________________________________________________________________
ANTECIPE A DEVOLUÇÃO DO SEU IRS e receba já o seu dinheiro...
I.R.Yes! da Capital Mais
http://www.iol.pt/correio/rodape.php?dst=0803281