IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6tc] Let the market decide or not: L2TP and/or TSP

"W. Mark Townsley" <townsley@cisco.com> Fri, 08 April 2005 20:06 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08127; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 16:06:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DJztN-0003kA-K1; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:15:50 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DJzjb-0003Lx-W4; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:05:43 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DJzjb-0003Lo-Jw for v6tc@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:05:43 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08074 for <v6tc@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 16:05:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DJzsP-0003d0-UY for v6tc@ietf.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:14:51 -0400
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (64.102.124.13) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Apr 2005 16:27:15 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: i="3.92,88,1112587200"; d="scan'208"; a="43747679:sNHT2243939162"
Received: from fruitpie.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@fruitpie.cisco.com [64.102.16.27]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j38K5FjI003979; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 16:05:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.83.1.101] (rtp-townsley-vpn4.cisco.com [10.83.1.101]) by fruitpie.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with SMTP id BGQ22899; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4256E3F8.4040705@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:05:12 -0400
From: "W. Mark Townsley" <townsley@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Subject: Re: [v6tc] Let the market decide or not: L2TP and/or TSP
References: <BE7CA492.F2D04%jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
In-Reply-To: <BE7CA492.F2D04%jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "v6tc@ietf.org" <v6tc@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: v6tc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6tc.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc>, <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/v6tc>
List-Post: <mailto:v6tc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc>, <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: v6tc-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: v6tc-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

>>1) is a combined mechanism for fixed/wireless 3G network still
>>important?
> 
> 
> Somehow I could say yes, because we don't want to have in the small devices
> (such as cellular phones, both protocols, for example when they have both 3G
> and WLAN interfaces).
> 
> But an alternative is a self adaptative protocol which is actually like both
> well integrated.

I think the clients would only really need to implement one type of protocol, 
though the servers would need to implement all.

- Mark

_______________________________________________
v6tc mailing list
v6tc@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email