D: because there will be of course , a portion of mobile access to such kind of application .
D: But , I think that 's not the majority
D: and that is not the major focus of um this kind of um this kind of application anyway .
D: So I would like to to uh split , in principle , the discussions of what kind of application tsk <comment> um f far away
D: and I would like to more to focus if we have certain kind of vision t concerning these building blocks and the network , Um , What kind of problem we are going to solve .
D: What kind of , uh , um , um , glue between these four building blocks exists
D: and what kind of synergy effects , in principle , as if they work and fit very well together exists for networking stuff .
D: And what kind of service could we provide in that area .
D: We will have these kind of , uh , really closely working together of these four building blocks .
D: So maybe uh , Wilbert , you can start to discu oder to to tell the group about what you mentioned yesterday concerning certain kind of ideas .
D: Maybe it 's a brainstorming um , of of these things
D: and maybe we can comment later on th these uh these ideas .
D: And I saw you sk still discuss with with uh Mark , right ?
D: some stuff .
D: Was it also related with with these things .
C: No .
D: No ?
D: OK , It was @ @ .
C: This afternoon you mean ?
D: Yeah .
C: No , this was unrelated to to the things of yesterday and last weeks
D: OK
D: Yeah , yeah .
D: Then , maybe then , one one w uh sentence before .
C: wha
D: I believe everybody fits very well in these kind of things .
D: Because from the mathematical description with QS - in - Advance , me , as an expert for quality of service and , uh , Michael as an expert for uh , MPLS and Wilbert an expert for for Multicast , and , uh , I discussed with Miguel . It 's uh maybe a little bit the shift to active routing ,
D: but it is still in the area of routing .
D: So . My idea is , in principle , to have , independently of any funding , independently of any outer contact , such such a core activity , in principle .
D: And we can see how much from the outer world can fit in .
D: First of all , the first stage is the institution which is behind everybody .
D: That means uh KPN in your case and Siemens in our case .
D: And maybe , then , in the broader world here other partners registered in the proposal migh
D: Tomorrow , I will go to Cisco , for instance ,
D: and I will discuss uh , all this kind of things .
D: Maybe they have certain additional activities and they 're interested in the results before D: The benefit here is , in principle , that the results are available .
D: They are not restricted any way .
D: If you have your own common activity . That makes a little bit more easier .
D: And , uh , if there is a technical linkage between such , uh um , between the outer world and us OK , the better it is .
D: But , anyway , if we come to a certain kind of uh , common work within the core of the NSA group , I think that 's really beneficial to everybody .
D: And uh , especially , Wilbert , if you have in mind to go in the <comment> mmm , uh , really from the project proposal view , I think we can build it on this this core .
D: You know ,
D: and go to the outer world with , and and and align it in a certain way .
D: For instance , that it also fit , maybe , to KPN , and Siemens , and in other companies .
D: Yeah .
C: Yeah , and  This probably has to be a brainstorm <comment> right now .
D: Yep .
C: Um What I told Joachim yesterday was that , uh uh for my company the company I work for , they are more interested in in an explicit service , than in core technology .
C: u
C: Me , on the other hand , I 'm more interested in uh , core service , or c core technology , myself .
C: So I 'm u I was thinking about uh , how I could combine the both of them .
C: KPN was , um they 're interested in having , uh like , six people or something , working on the project for one year
C: or maybe , uh , three people fo working on the project for two years ,
C: and have a kind of a demonstration uh , for a specifically in UMTS service .
B: Mm - hmm .
C: I was thinking that um as a well , not really a UMTS service , but  yesterday , what I discussed with Joachim was uh , a w little bit based on your ad - hoc networking also .
C: That it would be interesting to have a kind of a device where you can switch from w a WaveLAN Technology to , um , UMTS .
C: I think that 's , uh , it 's in in the future that will be a main competitor of , uh , of UMTS ,
B: Hmm - hmm - hmm .
C: too , like the the  the Lucent , uh , equipment has a l huge scope already ,
C: like five hundred feet , or or even more sometimes .
C: so that 's it 's might be interesting for , a service to walk into a building or whatever is available on that network .
C: You can switch from UMTS or uh uh , to WaveLAN Technologies .
D: Hmm .
B: Hmm - hmm - hmm .
D: Uh , maybe I will write a few keywords on the on the whiteboard
C: Sure .
D: OK .
C: Of course , it sounds strange for a company that does UMTS to switch to to be able to switch or provide the service to switch to WaveLAN
C: but at the end it makes it easier for your and cheaper for your customers .
C: So , if they don't do it , somebody else will probably do it .
B: And you can build a a  an a a double technology adapter , too .
B: So you can market these double - technology adapters .
B: And , this can be a a potential uh um you know , uh , income , too .
C: Yeah .
B: Because you just have to license , uh uh WaveLAN technology .
B: You can build , uh , the whole thing .
C: Yeah ,
B: This U - UMTS WaveLAN , uh mixed together .
C: and C: Yeah , something like that could be possible ,
C: maybe even a UMTS - to - WaveLAN - gateway ,
C: or I 'm not sure if that 's possible like we U - if UMTS re contains redirects or whatever , like switches .
C: I 'm not sure about it .
C: It could be .
B: Mmm .
B: I think , they are using different , uh , radio technologies .
B: So , uh , at the physical level , they 're they 're they are not compatible .
C: It 's not a problem .
C: No , but s You could have a UMTS gateway that translates everything to that uh w local @ @ .
B: Yeah .
B: Yeah .
C: If you will
B: That that 's right .
D: Yet the basic idea is , in principle , to switch seamlessly between wireless LAN technology , whatever and UMTS ,
D: right ?
C: Yes .
D: And you see the benefit that , in principle , the customer will save a lot of money .
D: Because if in - house communication like WaveLAN or maybe I see it also in the American market , some WaveLAN communication in the outer world will be available , the m and that is your assumption , that the more cost uh extensive um U M T S connection could be principle used , I would like to say , over WaveLAN ,
D: and then I have a normal WaveLAN connection , right ?
C: Yes .
D: And the router and the WaveLAN connection goes into the core internet elsewhere
D: and the connection is not dropped between this seamless hand off I would like to say .
C: Mm - hmm .
D: Right ?
D: or what or C: Well ,
C: If connection is lost , I am I 'm not sure if sometimes you 'd simply have to drop a connection . If you have outstanding connections .
D: What A: Yeah .
C: But that 's uh one thing of the internet ,
C: right ?
C: It 's should be able to unplug a host , bring it somewhere else and everything continues like it should be .
C: I 'm not sure i if it 's uh if you really have to con uh save a connection for all applications ,
C: I I don't think so .
D: Yeah , but if this is the final goal ,
D: it should be as much as possible available that you do not have to break the connection if you switch between the subnets ' technology
D: Right ?
B: Yeah but I I have a point uh regarding the this question , is eh the cost function .
B: I mean .
B: uh
B: What about the user who is switching from one let 's say zero - cost area network to another network where he has to pay .
B: It is OK for the service to continue when he uh switches from one network to another .
B: But probably , the user wants to be aware that he 's switching from one place from one network to another .
B: Because maybe , while he 's uh having , let 's say , a vide video conference uh over the the WaveLAN oh he 's not paying any extra cost .
B: But when he continues with this service on the UMTS , he 's having to cover uh an important let 's say , an important cost or some cost , non - null cost .
D: Yeah ,
D: non - null
B: So uh
B: this can be something that probably the user wants to be aware of .
B: Of course , this doesn't mean that the user wants the connection to be dropped when he switches . to the w uh r uh from the zero - cost area network to to the uh um non - null cost area network .
B: But maybe some users want to do this .
B: Because they say " OK B: I 'm not willing to pay any back for this service ,
B: because I 'm just watching uh you know the sports news .
B: So , if I switch If if , because of my motion , I 'm switching , or I 'm going out of the coverage of the of the uh wave uh wireless uh local area network , well , I I want the service to be uh stopped . "
B: And this can be some pattern then that some users will follow .
A: Yeah .
D: Yeah , but if your s
D: uh I believe everybody is aware about the USAIA architecture .
D: And uh this one is , here , this stuff is , here , also related to this kind what is mentioned there concerning the end system .
D: And in my conf uh considered end system , there is a certain kind of policy , concerning how to use subnets technologies and and all these kind of things .
D: How to use quality of service , you know , in advance ,
D: because you have to pay for certain technologies and maybe for certain services .
D: And that should not be done automatically .
D: But it could be done automatically .
D: But nevertheless there must be a certain kind of um user interaction always possible , that you could set up a certain kind of mini - database how to deal with all these kind of things .
D: I think that 's not a problem .
D: But uh what I I would like to ask Wilbert here , and we discuss it yesterday , " Is it only the usage of that PCMCIA card where you have instead of GSM today , UMTS , and instead of wireless LAN today also wireless LAN .
D: Remember your four and one card uh concerning um ,
D: what is the name , from Dataco - ?
D: No .
D: Dacom
C: Oh , the one I have Sitcom ?
D: Where you can enable four technologies , and you plug in , in your laptop
C: Yeah .
D: and then you have every four uh subnet layer technologies available in your laptop .
D: Is that the problem ?
D: Yeah , that 's not the problem .
D: Right .
C: Um .
C: Well , the switching itself could be a problem .
D: Why ?
C: Becau - well it 's a depends
C: if one of the other networks is available , maybe you are ,
C: I don't know .
C: So that could be a t topic for research ,
D: Yeah , but this i
C: so maybe you know more about it .
D: Yeah , but this is th only the probing to figure out that you get at a certain location the information that a s certain coverage of a certain subnet techn technology is available .
D: And if so , then what Miguel mentions , then you add a certain kind of policy , to switch or not to switch , to this kind of technology ,
C: Yeah .
D: right ?
C: Y Yes .
D: But this is end - system related .
D: That 's not network related .
D: I see no network related stuff within these in this uh idea .
C: Um .
D: It 's only to set up i u
D: For me it 's like a laptop t to plug one PCMCIA and currently will have two PCMCIA cards , and I compare GSM with UMTS .
B: Hmm - hmm - hmm .
D: And today I would like to have GSM ,
D: and then I have my GSM connectivity .
D: And I cannot use it other technology ,
D: only GSM , because the interfaces , the driver interface , does not permit me to switch between the between different technologies .
D: So if I want to go to wireless LAN I have to stop my connection and put in my wireless LAN PCMCIA card ,
D: and then I can go on and set up the the same connection one more time .
D: And what you have in mind , to do it a bit more seamlessly , and that makes an only sense for me if both technologies , in principle , were close together in that sense for application .
D: For instance , the application would be that I have my laptop here ,
D: and I work here with wi with my device ,
D: any kind of device ,
D: and I work here in wireless LAN area .
D: And then I go outside , and want to go still on , leaving the coverage of uh of the uh wireless LAN .
D: And at a certain state , the device uh receives certain signals that the coverage of UMTS or GSM is available .
D: And at that state , you automatically , or based on the certain kind of user profile , switched to the um UMTS <comment> or GSM st uh network .
D: That 's the only senseful application .
D: From my understanding , that means only to have a certain kind of control layer for the different drivers ,
D: which you also mentioned as a USAIA architecture .
D: and uh then to do the switching for an existing stream or application between these uh , transparently to this application , between those uh these both technologies .
D: Maybe there 's more potential .
D: I don't s see it ,
D: but maybe you have a additional idea .
D: And I don't think that this end system device uh architecture , which will come automatically .
D: And I believe there 's a lot of activity throughout the world ,
D: because this seamlessly communication is always mentioned elsewhere where you cou where you listen to .
D: So
D: uh uh
C: If if you can leave it out the network that will be really cool .
C: That 's what you w what I would like to do ,
C: so
C: Yes .
B: But when quality of service comes to the uh scene , well , I think we have a a bigger problem
B: because maybe this this uh uh seamless migration cannot be seamless at all ,
B: because maybe the the quality of service we are getting when we are connected to a certain network , let 's say high - speed networking , cannot be sustained when we are switching to a different technology .
B: So , this is another thing that is uh putting a little bit in more trouble our our scheme
B: or D: Now , I would like not to hear only three opinions .
A: Hm
D: But maybe there are also other opinions .
B: OK .
B: Yeah .
B: Oh , sorry .
D: And maybe everybody should uh give a short A: I think you D: Let us understand , built for everybody and their com whether their comments .
A: Yeah .
A: I think we should A: In this thing of seamless handoff or handovers should think more maybe in different layers ?
A: So one layer is having the seamless handover .
A: It 's clear if a technology doesn't provide that quality of service , you can't do magic and have it .
A: There are certain constraints on that .
A: It 's true .
A: That 's still in mind .
A: But for with the cases there There , it is possible .
A: So that should be made possible then ?
B: Mm - hmm .
B: Yeah .
B: Yeah .
A: So
B: It can be done .
B: It is just Mmm uh Trying to to to to poi to pinpoint The the possible problems .
A: Yeah .
A: There are still enough problems i in doing it .
A: Yeah .
A: Yep .
A: But it might be the wrong thing to promise , uh , ten megabits to everywhere .
A: There you are .
A: But saying " OK if it 's a if the technology is OK , you can do it . "
B: Yeah .
B: In fact , if you take the slower technology of the ones you are planning to to support , you can offer this warran this uh this throughput as uh the minimum warranty you you can get .
A: Yep .
A: Yep .
A: Yeah .
B: So , if everybody is is asking for less than this minimum amount , no problem at all .
B: But in this case , maybe not too much effort should be put on providing this quality of service
B: because you just have a usually a huge bandwidth compared on a a w with what the user is is using .
A: Yeah .
A: Yep .
A: Mm - hmm .
B: I mean , if you have a ten megabits bandwidth and the user is asking two kilobits per second , of course , you can uh build uh certain reserve mechanisms to warranty the user these two kilobits per second bandwidth .
B: But probably in it isn't it is not worth because you have so many uh available bandwidths that maybe uh it is not a problem .
D: Oh , please come in .
B: Hi .
A: Hi .
G: Hmm ?
G: Oh !
G: OK .
A: ist fertig .
D: Uh .
D: OK
B: Oh , OK .
D: Good luck .
C: The the thing is that we are looking for a research topic on on those uh four areas .
D: Yeah .
D: Yeah .
D: And the building blocks ,
D: yeah .
D: Multicast , not a topic .
C: So C: So we D: Routing ?
C: So so we went through uh uh to through multicast .
C: So this architecture with m
C: well , at least no wireless environment or a mobile IP environment , comparable to uh UMTS environments . We really did not find any well , difficulties there .
C: On the blackboard , that is .
C: Of course , in real life there will b probably be some problems .
B: Have you have you read about this uh Barwan project held at Berkeley University ?
D: Well , what you the pointer the pointer you sent yesterday .
C: Iceberg ?
B: Yeah .
D: Yeah ,
D: I c I didn't find the time , yeah , to do so ,
B: OK .
D: but ,
D: uh
C: You mean the Iceberg project ?
B: Barwan .
C: Barwan of uh ES
B: Barwan .
A: How 's it start ?
C: I know there 's one that 's of uh Randy Katz .
B: Uh da it was another related project called Daedalus .
C: Yes .
B: And uh well it seems they what they were doing was some kind of uh things si somehow similar to this .
C: They worked together wi little bit with Nokia ?
B: u
B: Uh Don't know .
C: Palo Alto ?
C: Mountain View ?
B: I I I I just uh take a a quick uh look at the at the thing
B: because I I was uh read about this uh a long time ago .
B: And it the the latest report I I found was in nineteen ninety eight .
B: And in this report , well , they they pres they have uh some slides , some uh papers , some well , a lot of things .
C: Hmm .
B: And well the main thing and the quick uh thing I I was uh looking at was a a video available in MP - thr in MPG M - peg format .
B: And uh
B: well what this video was presenting was a kind of test of of one guy with a portable computer , moving across different networks .
B: So starting at the CS department at Berkeley
B: and then going out the street
B: switching to the a campus - wide network ,
B: uh um I think it 's a Metricom uh network ,
B: an which is uh a test D: A Ricochet here , right ?
B: Ricochet ,
B: yeah ,
D: Yeah .
D: Yeah .
B: that 's right .
D: Yeah .
B: And then , finally switching to I think it was city PD or something like this .
B: OK .
B: I as lo uh as the as the user is moving out of the of the coverage area of this second network .
B: And , well , what they have built is a a kind of uh proxy structure .
B: So they are they are putting most of the work of this adaptational layer on  on the side of the proxies .
B: So the client or the server is not changed .