Opened 13 years ago

Closed 13 years ago

Last modified 12 years ago

#78 closed defect (fixed)

DHCP is a mobility management protocol too

Reported by: kempf@… Owned by: kempf@…
Priority: trivial Milestone:
Component: nohost-ps Severity:
Keywords: PS draft Cc: netlmm@…

Description (last modified by kempf@…)

Fred Templin says:

2) Section 1.0, need to mention DHCP and others as localized mobility management alternatives. Suggest adding a new third sentence such as: "Additionally, other mechanisms such as the standard protocols of DHCP involve host-based solutions that are independent of Mobile IP."

and later:

12) Section 4.0, first paragraph, add the following as item 3):

"3) Standard protocols such as DHCP that require support in

the mobile node's IP stack and/or integration with IP forwarding mechanisms in the access network."

and still later:

13) Section 4.0, following the paragraph beginning: "Market acceptance of WLAN switches", add the following new paragraph:

"Market acceptance of DHCP has been very large, so Solution 3 is widely deployed and continuing to grow. Solution 3 requires DHCP client support in the host stack. (Alternatively, the DHCP client function could be implemented as a proxy in the access network.)"

14) Section 4.0, change: "The advantages that this solution has over the Solutions 1 and 2 above" to: The advantages that this solution has over Solutions 1-3 above".

15) Section 4.0, final paragraph, add the following:

"3) Compared with Solution 3, an IP level network-based

solution offloads the mobile node from having to explicitly participate in mobility management. The tradeoffs between network-based mobility management and Solution 3 need to be carefully analyzed for applicability in various use-case scenarios."

Change History (6)

comment:1 Changed 13 years ago by kempf@…

  • Status changed from new to assigned

Although curiously not defined in RFC 3753, the term "mobility management protocol" is typically considered to be a protocol in the Network Layer that provides a mobile node with session continuity across IP level handovers between IP subnets, for applications such as VoIP. DHCP certainly does not qualify under that concensus definition. However, it is true that DHCP has made nomadic computing - where a laptop moves from one subnet to another without requiring session continuity - possible. Before DHCP, IP nodes were statically assigned addresses which made nomadic computing very difficult. NETLMM and this document are not discussing nomadic computing, so it is difficult to see how DHCP could be considered.

DHCP may play a role in interacting with NETLMM for movement detection, but this is a detail that is not relevant at the high level scope of a problem statement.

Suggest adding the following in Section 1.1 (in "*...*") to clarify the scope of mobility management. To the definition of Localized Mobility Management:

"maintains the IP connectivity and reachability of a mobile node *for purposes of maintaining session continuitity* when *the mobile node* moves"

and to Global Mobility Management:

"mobility protocol used by the mobile node to change the global, end-to-end routing of packets *for purposes of maintaining session continuity*"

comment:2 Changed 13 years ago by kempf@…

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:3 Changed 13 years ago by kempf@…

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:4 Changed 13 years ago by kempf@…

  • version changed from 1.0 to 2.0

comment:5 Changed 13 years ago by kempf@…

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from assigned to closed

comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by anonymous

  • Milestone milestone2 deleted

Milestone milestone2 deleted

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.