[H.323 Mobility:] Comments to various mails

[Chris Wayman Purvis]

Just to clarify,

> > I am providing a very quick response because we will have the
> > conf call
> > within 45 minutes.
> Same here...
>
> > Second, the H.323 mobility protocol proposed by AT&T, Alcatel
> > or others do
> > NOT tie to any topology. The topology shown has come into
> > play to provide
> > descriptions so that people can understand, and we can say
> > all requirements
> > are met no matter what the topoloy is. For example, your
> > contribution and
> > references figures - we need to see whether all toplopies can
> > be satisfied
> > using the SAME protocol.
>
> I did not claim that the contributions were tied to any topology. I was
> simply questioning the need to define or use the terms: home/visited
> network/zone.

I hope it's well understood that there need be no correlation at all between
networks and zones.  A gatekeeper's zone may be thinly spread among many
physical networks, and many gatekeepers may serve endpoints on the same shared
network (even possibly on the same shared ethernet segment).  There is no
restriction that says that zones must be limited to network topology in any way
whatsoever.

But then again I've probably missed something because I still don't understand
why the application layer needs to get involved at all, and H.323 Mobility
isn't simply covered by the sentence "Use MobileIP!"...

Regards,
Chris
--
Dr Chris Purvis -- Development Manager
ISDN Communications Ltd, The Stable Block, Ronans, Chavey Down Road
Winkfield Row, Berkshire.  RG42 6LY  ENGLAND
Phone: +44 1344 899 007
Fax:   +44 1344 899 001