RE: on the point of mobility & multihoming

["Kanchei Loa" <loa@ieee.org>]

There are many factors (technical and non-technical) affecting the decision
to select a specific link layer  for ISP connections. The performance of all
wireless technologies varies with time and space, which is the nature of the
beast.
Brian Carpenter said "We are looking for a solution that doesn't care why
the physical signal fails". I agree with him

-----------------
Kanchei Loa
loa@ieee.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-multi6@ops.ietf.org
> [mailto:owner-multi6@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of Masataka Ohta
> Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 4:38 PM
> To: Kanchei Loa
> Cc: Brian E Carpenter; multi6@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: on the point of mobility & multihoming
>
>
> Kanchei Loa;
>
> > Router d connects to
> > local community networks (cost $50 per month), which are served by two
> > 802.11b providers ISP Da and ISP Db. This branch office is
> setup to support
> > their business in local community. So, router d is as important as other
> > exit routers. When the weather is bad or other RF factors,
> traffic driving
> > by disconnects constantly changes branch office's preferred
> access point.
>
> You are applying 802.11b technology wrongly, then.
>
> If the branch office is setup to support their business in local
> community, 802.11b link of router d is as important as and should
> be as stable as other links of other exit routers.
>
> If a link to an ISP constantly disconects, two links to the ISP
> constantly disconnect that the ISP is useless.
>
> Or, you can still use the ISP with the quality for less serious
> purposes, which has nothing to do with M6.
>
> > The "wireless" make  "ad hoc site multihoming" a practical engineering
>
> Neither "wireless" nor "ad hoc" means "unreliable" nor "unstable".
>
> 							Masataka Ohta
>
>
>
>