Re: [More] Session Mobility

[James Kempf <James.Kempf@Sun.COM>]

>IMHO somes of these requirements could be addressed and realised by some of the
>work on end-point multi-homing being performed by other WGs. SCTP,
>draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-02.txt and the multi6 WG may offer solutions to the
>Session Mobility requirments without requiring the need for additional network
>functionality.
>

Multihoming may be a partial contributor to solving the problem of
how to move a mobile host's IP traffic from one interface to another,
though there are other mechanisms involving Mobile IP that would
problem work as well, provided, of course, the mobile host is
using Mobile IP as its mobility protocol.

>As an example, the application sessions mentioned in the draft (http, ssl, tcp,
>telnet, ftp) and the ability to transfer them from
>a IMT-2000 RAN to a 802.11 LAN or other access technology could be achieved 
with
> multi-homing. Supporting, session
>transfers within the network requires a network element to maintain session
>state information. Failure of this element
>would impact all currently active sessions. In a multi-homed end-point scenario
>the failure of the access network elements
>does not impact sessions.
>
>

I guess I don't see why more is needed than simply moving the
mobile's IP traffic from one interface to another. No need to move
state, simply change the routing.

If you are talking about moving these application sessions from
one host to another, then there is a potential problem, and
I think the problem is probably not solvable in a generalized
way, i.e. each application protocol would have to solve the
problem itself. Like SIP does, for example.

		jak