Hi Satya,
The BCP should bring out the best practices
and the results of such practices in the industry.
BCP need not cover all schemes if all of them are
not used widely. As a start, we have taken
all schemes that are being used and tried to
evaluate them. This does not mean that all the schemes
will go into final document, we are planning to
collect some more information to finalize the list of
widely used schemes. Interestingly, during the last
year's ETSI IPv6 Plugtest Event we found that
the Eager Cell Switching is the one which
more people are using. Also this error rate is for a
particular test setup and may not be same
always.
Also look into Greg's mails regarding BCPs for
DNA.
Regards,
Syam
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 2:05
AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Best current practice
for DNA
Dear JinHyeock,
Thanks for the response.
I have a
general question about BCP.
Should BCP talk about all possible schemes
along with the possibility
of errors (errors leading to unnecessary
re-configuration of the interface) in each scheme
or should it avoid the
ones that have high errors. For example, is it a good idea to
mention
eager cell switching (with 48% error rate) as part of BCP?
Can somebody
please comment?
regards,
Sathya
JinHyeock Choi wrote:
018501c40a6c$a7178a20$e82f024b@jinchoe type="cite">Dear Sathya
[omitted]
I have a question regarding the results presented in section 6.4 Erroneous Movement
Detection. The report has 0% error rate for the first three schemes. I was wondering
what would happen if RAs or NAs were lost.
There would be error.
The 0% error rate is the special result under our particular testbed condition.
We tested those schemes in rather ideal link condition, one MN with little
contending traffic. If there are multiple MNs with heavy traffic under bad wireless
condition, we guess there would be problem.
Best Regards
JinHyeock