Hi Neels,
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 06:22:28PM +0100, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
I'm on the load-based handover patches: it is
adding a second handover decision
algorithm. What keeps slightly itching me about it is that it is not really
cleanly separate from the first (current) handover algorithm.
I think it's not worth worrying too much about that.
The point being, if we add a third, fourth, fifth HO
algo at some point, this
would probably become a tad intransparent.
I think we can leave it as the burden to whoever will implement / contribute such
additional
algorithms for the time being. Our goal is to get Jolly's pending patches of a few
years finally merged, and not delay this by another month or so to invent new
infrastructure
for hypothetical future additional algorithms.
Do we want separate sets of parameters for ho1 and
ho2? For example, for the
rxlev window averaging, is it better to have one setting used for both ho1 and
ho2, or do I expect each algo to remember its own rxlev averaging settings?
Let's keep it like it is (shared parameters shared, specific parameters specific)
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org>
http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)