RE: [Seamoby] CAR Discovery Requirements

Hi Hesham,

It's not quite clear to me what you propose. Do you want requirement 9,
i.e., the independence from the mobility mgt., to be removed or to be
changed
to a SHOULD requirement?
The said requirement 9 exactly states that the final solution should
be able to be used with ANY mobility mgt. protocol. It does not ignore
that CAR is used in the context of mobility.

My concern regarding Phil's comment was that he mentioned specific
methods to be mandatory in the final solution. I don't think it's a 
good idea to define specific methods as requirements since they
restrict the solution space. That was simply my comment. 

Regards,

Dirk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Hesham Soliman (ERA) [mailto:hesham.soliman@era.ericsson.se]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 7:34 AM
> To: Trossen Dirk (NRC/Boston); ext Phillip Neumiller; Govind
> Krishnamurthi; seamoby@ietf.org
> Cc: Krishnamurthi Govind (NRC/Boston)
> Subject: RE: [Seamoby] CAR Discovery Requirements
> 
> 
>   > > 
>   > > 2).  It MUST provide a query (client server) and/or a post 
>   > > (publish and
>   > >      subscribe) method to allow other mobility protocols like 
>   > > those being
>   > >      worked on in the MIP and MANET WGs to cooperate with 
>   > > this protocol.
>   > 
>   > Requirement 9 of the current list already states the 
>   > independence of any
>   > mobility management protocol. Why do you want to enforce specific
>   > methods that have to be provided to ensure (from your 
> point of view)
>   > said independence? 
>   > In conclusion, I think said requirement 9 is sufficient 
>   > since it leave
>   > more freedom for the actual solution.
> 
> => I think it's important to be realistic, there is a 
> difference between designing it _for_ MIP and MANET, 
> and designing it to allow usage _with_ MIP and MANET. 
> The latter is a minimum requirement IMO. Ignoring that
> there are mobility protocols that should be used 
> with the final solution, when the entire problem 
> is mostly relevant to mobile devices, doesn't seem
> realistic to me.
> 
> So I agree with Phil's comment.
> 
> Hesham
>   > 
>   > Regards,
>   > 
>   > 
>   > 
>   > 
>   > Dirk
>   > 
>   > _______________________________________________
>   > Seamoby mailing list
>   > Seamoby@ietf.org
>   > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
>   > 
> 

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby