Re: [Seamoby] RE: what is edge signalling? (was: RE: [NSIS] Re: Comments on draft-westphal-nsis-qos-mobileip-00.txt)

Hello Gary,

Thanks for your note.  It seems to me that, with your
further explanation, we are in agreement.  And, I agree
that during CT there typically shouldn't be any service
negotiation, maybe even never.  If it occurs, it should
be considered to be part of CAR discovery, not CT.

Regards,
Charlie P.

> Gary Kenward wrote:
> 
> Charlie:
> 
>   I guess the word "negotiate" really trips me up here. CT is a
> protocol for transferring forwarding service context, not for negotiating
> services between ARs. If service negotiation is required, then NSIS could be
> the protocol to be used.
> 
>   In my statement that you quote below, I used the words "should not": in
> the normal course of a handover, service negotiation must be rare.
> Negotiation,
> by definition, takes time, and anything that takes time will generally delay
> the service from being supported at the new AR. In the normal course of a
> handover,
> less signalling is always better.
> 
>   In wireless, of course, the exception is the rule, and so there must be
> contingencies for service negotiation. This would be NSIS' role.
> 
>   And so, I did not make my point clear. My main intent was to emphasize that
> if there is a link between CT and NSIS, it is a very simple one: if CT fails
> to provide a context that is useable by the new AR, then NSIS may be used to
> negotiate a suitable service with the network (and thus establish suitable
> context at the new AR).
> 
> Cheers,
> Gary

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