Re: [Seamoby] Minutes for Meeting at IETF 53

["Xiaoming Fu" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

I have not been following this discussion closely, so sorry if this
has been clear to all:

(In IETF53minutes / Requirement 5 - FORMAT OF CAPABILITIES):
The capabilities MUST be described in a standard format which is TBD.

=> Is "TBD" task within the Seamoby/CARD? Or it is going to like 
"The exact format differs (and/or derives) from the capacity 
parameters specified by specific L2 technologies"?


(Rajeev's mail: 
CARD: a process that facilitates resolving the prospective link(identifier)
with its prefix and assocaited capabilities. This comes out as off-link ARP
with extensions.
TARS: a process that assists in selecting _a_ router from among multiple
candidates.)

=>Where does CARD end?
If I understand correctly, it's (current) ARs. "Associated capabilities" also 
include some higher-layer information e.g., QoS and security. So when 
CARD is used, perhaps one possibility is that the same information in CT 
could be avoided to save wireless bandwidth. 

=>How does TARS possibly :
MN may (e.g., periodically) ask its (current) AR for a TARS by checking 
into "associated capabilities". My understanding is, when this
succeeds a L2 identifier of a TAR may only be returned to MN. It may 
be still impossible for the AR (and henceforce the MN) to identify the IP 
address of TAR (because the AR only knows about the L2 identifiers & 
associated capacity of CARs). Is it then necessary to let the (current)AR 
"solicitate" L3 advertisement from TAR?

Thanks,
Xiaoming