From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 13:24:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FCDD21F87C9 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:24:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.885 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.714, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yhD20FoEFj1D for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:24:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81ED21F881F for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:24:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A8A940157; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 22:24:30 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F552F0D.5070904@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:24:29 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120305-1, 05/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: "Christophe \(w\) Janneteau" Subject: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:24:40 -0000 Hello netext participants, We have submitted a short Internet Draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 It treats of moving networks within a PMIPv6 domain. It offers two alternative mechanisms: - HNP Division - PMIPv6 is not modified, HNP is divided into two or more MNPs. - Enhancements to PMIPv6 and DHCPv6-PD - Q bit, DHCP allocates MNP whereas PMIP is just informed (DUID=MNID). We are interested in discussion about this draft. The text is relatively brief now but we can offer clarification depending on interest. Yours, Alex From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 13:37:31 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E6A21F8818 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:37:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.028 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.028 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.857, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OJi851e+mZGV for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:37:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8C721F881E for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:37:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F7694010D for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 22:37:23 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F553212.8030101@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:37:22 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: <1330455094.4190.52.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> In-Reply-To: <1330455094.4190.52.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120305-1, 05/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Review of draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:37:31 -0000 Le 28/02/2012 19:51, Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano a écrit : > Hi, > > As promised in the last meeting, I've reviewed > draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt. Here are my comments: > > - I think the goals of the document should be more clear, as 3 > different concepts are involved: DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation, Proxy > Mobile IPv6 and NEMO. Actually, I think this is not an easy problem > to solve, because the scenario described in the document is not > really a NEMO one (I'll explain this better below). > > - The abstract says: "This document specifies an extension to Proxy > Mobile IPv6 protocol for supporting network mobility using > DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation.". This is not very aligned with the > title of the document, which seems to suggest that the document just > specifies how to delegate prefixes using DHCPv6 in PMIPv6 (but in > reality the document does more than this). > > - The abstract also says: "DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation can be used to > assign a prefix or prefixes to a mobile router for use on the links > in the mobile network as specified in [RFC6276] but not supported in > Proxy Mobile IPv6.". RFC6276 is for use with the Network Mobility > Basic Support protocol (RFC 3963), but the draft does not consider > NEMO at all, as what is called "Mobile Router" does not have any IP > mobility support at all. Therefore, any link between RC3963/RFC6275 > and the draft may lead to confusion, IMHO. I agree. > - In the Introduction (and in the rest of the document), the term > Mobile Router (MR) is used, though it is not accurate, as RFC3963 > tends to implicitly assume that an MR implements the NEMO BS protocol > (e.g., "A Mobile Router has a unique Home Address through which it is > reachable when it is registered with its Home Agent."). However, in > the draft, it is mentioned that "The specification assumes that a MR > is a regular IPv6 router without extension for mobility > managements.", so I think it's better not to call this "router" MR. Hm, I tend to agree. It is however a sign to me that people tend to understand many different things by MR, and not just a MIP6/NEMOv6 MR. > - I'd rewrite the Introduction to make the problem scope clearer. I > needed to read the whole document to get the full picture (it was > not clear to me when I was reading the intro). > > - I'd avoid using normative text (like MUST) in the intro. > > - In Section 3.1, the document starts mixing the terms MN and MR, > which again, is a source of potential misunderstandings. For example, > it says "The MR (as a RR) MUST either obtain the Home Network Prefix > (HNP) before initiating the DHCPv6-PD procedure or in case of > stateful address configuration simultaneously while configuring the > Mobile Node Home Address (MN-HoA)." MN is a very confusing term when used in the context of network mobility. Contrary to the term "MR" (sometimes not MIP6 in some text), MN is more often required to implement MIP. Besides, MN is udnesrtood as a MH or a MR depending on context. IMHO it is good to make this distinction clearer, to avoid misunderstandings generated by MN being sometimes MH other times MR. > > - I don't see why the MR should support the Prefix Exclude Option. > > - In Section 3.2: "If the network mobility service needs to be > offered to the mobile node, the mobile access gateway MUST set the > Mobile Router Flag (R) when sending the Proxy Binding Update (PBU) > message to the LMA.". I think this cannot be done, as RFC3963 states > that "The Mobile Router Flag is set to indicate to the Home Agent > that the Binding Update is from a Mobile Router.". Therefore, if the > "R" bit is set, that means that the (P)BU is sent by an MR > implementing RFC3963 (which is not the case here), unless this draft > is updating RFC3963. I fully agree. I think that rather than (wrongly) reusing the R bit flag in (P)BU for MNP then rather define a new flag - "Q" . > - In Section 3.3.1, the terms "MN" and "MR" are again mixed, which > makes it complex to follow. > > - Another, IMHO, source of potential misleading, is the use of the > MNP option, which again is tightly related to the RFC3963. Not sure > if it'd be good to define a new option for this. For example, the HNP > and MNP options are exactly the same format-wise, but we have two > different options (types) because it is better not to overload too > much them. Maybe require a new Type, to be a Type within a PBU to mean MNP. > - In Section 3.4.2, it says: "On receiving a packet from the > bi-directional tunnel established with the MR's LMA, the MAG MUST > use the destination address of the inner packet to forward it on the > interface where the destination MNP is hosted." --> does this mean > that the packet is not decapsulated and then routed, but routed based > on the inner packet destination address? If so, this seems very weird > to me. I guess the tunnel ends at the MAG, like in regular PMIPv6 for > a host. In that case, I'd say that some additional text about > forwarding considerations on the MAG is missing (e.g., the MAG has to > add a route for the "MNP" via the "MR"). If necessary, a clearer description could be written about this. The way the MAG forwards packets to MNP'ed LFNs depends on that interface being ptp or shared, and on having added or not an entry with respect to the link-local address of MR's egress interface. > - In Section 3.5.2, it says: "In order to receive those packets, the > LMA MUST advertise a connected route into the routing infrastructure > for the MR's MNP(s).". I guess the "advertisement" is not really > mandatory (no need of using MUST there), as what is required is that > the LMA anchores the prefix, right? To me this advertisement word is often difficult to understand. Besides, a "connected" route is something on-link on Cisco and other routers - LMA does not hold such route for MNP. Maybe MAG, and only if not ptp link. Listening for comments, Alex > - I'd say that the Security Considerations section may benefit from > additional text. I have not thought of that carefully, but at least > some examples of the SPD and SAD entries used to protect the > signaling could be helpful (e.g., as used in RFC6276). > > This is just a first batch of comments. I think the document needs > an update and further revisions. Regarding the document's scope, I > think it's very important to make it clear. For example, as it is > now, a rader could think that this document addresses the problem I > tried to describe in draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps-01, but > this is not the case. While writing that draft I learned/suffered > myself how difficult is to clearly explain the problem. > > In case it is not clear, I'm supportive of the problem described in > draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-01. I'm just trying to help here, so don't > take my comments as negative ones. > > Thanks, > > Carlos > > > > > _______________________________________________ netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From sgundave@cisco.com Mon Mar 5 16:35:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EEAE21E8028 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:35:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.928 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.928 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.671, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qeW1HF18hx9s for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0EB421E8017 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:35:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=963; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1330994152; x=1332203752; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=LRmKZCAtbQ6ukwhBle8ZdFIwzFkFX3hy+wF86IDs8ao=; b=DV5lIKsVPcQNXCuFVX36BZT/+fiyyJjJDInJZ5hRJmjJ79D1iZw8slH9 ldDHd9UcdTTT0xzsBxmV6hv1T1IXtc2oFzcPPO7D6aZj526rXLjvtT4Fp 3+mkjMvTvazNscbsP2d7RU5ioabblA/8kzmhnJHIKuiybWbPEkC2OkIDR g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAMJaVU+rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABDtGiBB4F9AQEBAwEBAQEPAScCATELBQ0BCGcGMAEBBAENBSKHYAQBC5lTAZ5xiS2HIgSIUIxuix2EdYME X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,537,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="32101718" Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Mar 2012 00:35:50 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q260ZoUq010070; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:35:50 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:35:50 -0800 Received: from 10.32.246.211 ([10.32.246.211]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:35:50 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121 Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:35:49 -0800 From: Sri Gundavelli To: Alexandru Petrescu , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 Thread-Index: Acz7MRO88s+bpgoeFEGsziVoFvI1Tg== In-Reply-To: <4F552F0D.5070904@gmail.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2012 00:35:50.0630 (UTC) FILETIME=[14B55860:01CCFB31] Cc: "Christophe \(w\) Janneteau" Subject: Re: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:35:52 -0000 Hi Alex: Question. How is this draft different from the WG document on PD ? Regards Sri On 3/5/12 1:24 PM, "Alexandru Petrescu" wrote: > Hello netext participants, > > We have submitted a short Internet Draft: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 > > It treats of moving networks within a PMIPv6 domain. It offers two > alternative mechanisms: > > - HNP Division - PMIPv6 is not modified, HNP is divided into two or > more MNPs. > - Enhancements to PMIPv6 and DHCPv6-PD - Q bit, DHCP allocates MNP > whereas PMIP is just informed (DUID=MNID). > > We are interested in discussion about this draft. The text is > relatively brief now but we can offer clarification depending on interest. > > Yours, > > Alex > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From sarikaya2012@gmail.com Tue Mar 6 10:01:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA2E11E8076; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:01:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.559 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T-b4eBqsruVS; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:01:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01C0711E8075; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by yenm5 with SMTP id m5so2694071yen.31 for ; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sarikaya2012@gmail.com designates 10.100.212.4 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.100.212.4; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sarikaya2012@gmail.com designates 10.100.212.4 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sarikaya2012@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=sarikaya2012@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.100.212.4]) by 10.100.212.4 with SMTP id k4mr11017503ang.35.1331056876689 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=/UOmZnrLLoalj4P7TkM81us1dI7BTG9DibDqj7dwleo=; b=N23e7FlM+0pxBKCFUljMoaCfXKhy3jLtlm9qgcfRMVzyTaXNNh20rdBTp1sjB6rlpD KIqPm7UdFvyTITgDLOXAA3aokzjMbXl6AhBKXJjxpJ7ukeoxHo3PDXAkd3GRCzyrKVF2 SQiOLryUQSjtpAgjaOAuLtZJQA3Pzn+kocmi15pmhQ2cXxrfplNWN2D66dBeUlf87qMD Uisaj44WDI1xsE7kn8kTPn9xY9IqrlPNwvMrqpQRRRUHpiHByr/63woGjYwFwuebdryd UY17fFFwe/zc+WlazfqG+8uCDgLj9Cr2iI+cgu/vKA5ADsAGAERREBZ6ao4UmPWQDjdG 3iLQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.212.4 with SMTP id k4mr8727102ang.35.1331056876570; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.236.9.73 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:01:16 -0600 Message-ID: From: Behcet Sarikaya To: dmm@ietf.org, netext@ietf.org, mip4@ietf.org, multimob@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [netext] FMC Bar BoF at IETF 83 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 18:01:18 -0000 This is to announce that we have requested a slot for a Bar BoF in Paris on Fixed Mobile Convergence as follows: Tuesday March 28 at 19:30 There has been (business) announcements in the internet like beyond stating that FMC is currently still a hot topic (and finally a MUST facing decreasing revenue challenges) for many network and service operators - reflected in the manufacturing industry for infrastructure equipment as well as user terminals - and creating requirements on the interworking between fixed and mobile networks which - from an Intarea point of view - focus on - User Equipment identification and authentication, - Femto Access Point management, - user device type identification and - mobility considerations e.g. as support within fixed networks and differentiation on different session flows from terminal/user perspective. see also http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xue-intarea-fmc-ps-00 In the Bar BOF we want to discuss these issues and eventually others. If you have a presentation to make, drop us a note. Behcet & Dirk From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Tue Mar 6 12:43:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06A7B21F8770 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:43:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.742 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.742 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.571, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FPnyHfOmrHxv for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:43:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A76421F876A for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:43:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7224694013D; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 21:43:05 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F5676D7.2070900@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:43:03 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sri Gundavelli References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120306-0, 06/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:43:18 -0000 Sri, Thank you for the question. There are two basic differences: The WG document on PD assumes that PMIP allocates the prefix, whereas this draft assumes DHCP allocates it. The WG document does not describe a method of dividing the HNP in order to obtain an MNP, whereas this draft does. What do you think? Alex Le 06/03/2012 01:35, Sri Gundavelli a écrit : > Hi Alex: > > Question. How is this draft different from the WG document on PD ? > > Regards Sri > > > > > On 3/5/12 1:24 PM, "Alexandru > Petrescu" wrote: > >> Hello netext participants, >> >> We have submitted a short Internet Draft: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 >> >> It treats of moving networks within a PMIPv6 domain. It offers >> two alternative mechanisms: >> >> - HNP Division - PMIPv6 is not modified, HNP is divided into two >> or more MNPs. - Enhancements to PMIPv6 and DHCPv6-PD - Q bit, DHCP >> allocates MNP whereas PMIP is just informed (DUID=MNID). >> >> We are interested in discussion about this draft. The text is >> relatively brief now but we can offer clarification depending on >> interest. >> >> Yours, >> >> Alex _______________________________________________ netext mailing >> list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > From sgundave@cisco.com Tue Mar 6 17:18:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18D4021E802D for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 17:18:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.982 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.982 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.617, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dM476m664Xzv for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 17:18:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-4.cisco.com (mtv-iport-4.cisco.com [173.36.130.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61C5721E8028 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 17:18:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=2132; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1331083117; x=1332292717; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=w5MPXtzwIFND30sVATT+i8Z8iIRRLy+FQfR+vD6cD1k=; b=Gj/C78u1ZZgx7LIHk7K7qHsZZb2L8mAeZ0JWOnfX5NH4Dx5C34v58Hg4 ODjShnoP4HPT4iyz7QVBr5cCyTQnluCJfZpKj5YnpMdXh3+9zuQeWufKZ /R8Fdch32O3vf5ljoyS4Sr4PID2laa0Bn/Q9hd38yw/nRe71SDwOlMDhY U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EACu3Vk+rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABDtQWBB4F9AQEBAwEBAQEPASkBMQsFDQEIGE8GMAEBBA4FIodgBAELmkcBnwqJO4c1BIgfM4xtiyCEdoME X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,542,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="34753281" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Mar 2012 01:18:26 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q271IQi1018703; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 01:18:26 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 17:18:26 -0800 Received: from 10.32.246.211 ([10.32.246.211]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 01:18:26 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121 Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 17:18:27 -0800 From: Sri Gundavelli To: Alexandru Petrescu Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 Thread-Index: Acz8ADLWqhaBmRkuxUytBaqJWpFQuw== In-Reply-To: <4F5676D7.2070900@gmail.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Mar 2012 01:18:26.0432 (UTC) FILETIME=[327F8800:01CCFC00] Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 01:18:38 -0000 Alex: - DHCP PD is the protocol interface that we have with the mobile router. - The allocate prefix, if done by DHCP server, or LMA, needs to be managed in the BCE, as there is routing state and mobility associated with that. So= , PMIP does allocate the prefix in some sense. - If we look at MNP's as a set of prefixes, and HNP's as a set of prefixes, if they are aggregatable to a single larger prefix, or if they belong to a non-contiguous space is more about assignment policy. So, may be its the same. Regards Sri On 3/6/12 12:43 PM, "Alexandru Petrescu" wrote: > Sri, >=20 > Thank you for the question. There are two basic differences: >=20 > The WG document on PD assumes that PMIP allocates the prefix, whereas > this draft assumes DHCP allocates it. >=20 > The WG document does not describe a method of dividing the HNP in order > to obtain an MNP, whereas this draft does. >=20 > What do you think? >=20 > Alex >=20 > Le 06/03/2012 01:35, Sri Gundavelli a =E9crit : >> Hi Alex: >>=20 >> Question. How is this draft different from the WG document on PD ? >>=20 >> Regards Sri >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On 3/5/12 1:24 PM, "Alexandru >> Petrescu" wrote: >>=20 >>> Hello netext participants, >>>=20 >>> We have submitted a short Internet Draft: >>>=20 >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 >>>=20 >>> It treats of moving networks within a PMIPv6 domain. It offers >>> two alternative mechanisms: >>>=20 >>> - HNP Division - PMIPv6 is not modified, HNP is divided into two >>> or more MNPs. - Enhancements to PMIPv6 and DHCPv6-PD - Q bit, DHCP >>> allocates MNP whereas PMIP is just informed (DUID=3DMNID). >>>=20 >>> We are interested in discussion about this draft. The text is >>> relatively brief now but we can offer clarification depending on >>> interest. >>>=20 >>> Yours, >>>=20 >>> Alex _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>> list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>=20 >>=20 >=20 From denghui02@gmail.com Tue Mar 6 20:11:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5696D21E8061 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 20:11:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.255 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.255 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.343, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M2woBuuLXzQ9 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 20:11:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40E6F21E8052 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 20:11:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by yenm5 with SMTP id m5so3007615yen.31 for ; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:11:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=W6B0q8TH5pC7MhJh+Y9JMjn0HaG786B2X+u32wyq8BQ=; b=A7clALlzToiNc6iNNWtjhacgUqa38biGp21b3Ez8qrq4t+TEet0ij7JYss096piWkr aCsU2GeEiaolW7FXbleZjta/BnFhW/FQ9NeawTfE0+QKsjWiQ+HAWXDRwjRSqqbvHBNo syzYT20y0MGHZ1Mc5nf94BmX0zRPCqfyNA5ZXnaSb0N92ayHmedosHN80E4WB2D0eExk d1s6JBWH3Gl90LpzPnQllaHndCN+hM38lthFLK5/waJDw9/LGzocMY7ZPcCMJFsOy3E/ Wn8YRD4lyX5flLYUuzU0kR1PuWzLfCZdpgP8tDaDKntV1zRohxZOUNu+XJWFNmjbknQZ bqnQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.189.5 with SMTP id b5mr812544yhn.93.1331093475877; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:11:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.147.123.12 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 20:11:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:11:15 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf305640ffcae1f704ba9f59a6 Subject: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 04:11:18 -0000 --20cf305640ffcae1f704ba9f59a6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Rajeev, I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authentication could indicate handover, so 1) maybe handover indicator is better than multiaccess indicator because UE connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces 2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension, without this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong source address) thanks a lot for your consideration -Hui ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: > Date: 2012/3/3 > Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility > Author(s) : Rajeev Koodli > Jouni Korhonen > Filename : draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt > Pages : 8 > Date : 2012-03-02 > > When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple > access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to > know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access, > so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most > appropriate interface. This document defines a new EAP attribute > which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network > Gateway. The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag. > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt**** > > ** ** > --20cf305640ffcae1f704ba9f59a6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Rajeev,
=A0
I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authenticatio= n could indicate handover, so
1) maybe handover indicator=A0is better than multiaccess indicator bec= ause UE connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces
=A0
2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension= , without this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong sour= ce address)
=A0
thanks a lot for your consideration
=A0
-Hui

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <= ;internet-dra= fts@ietf.org>
Date: 2012/3/3
Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli= -netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt
To: i-d-announce= @ietf.org



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-= line Internet-Drafts directories.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Rajeev Koodli
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jouni Korhonen
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt
=A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 8
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0: 2012-03-02

=A0 When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple=A0 access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to
= =A0 know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access, =A0 so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most
= =A0 appropriate interface. =A0This document defines a new EAP attribute
= =A0 which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network
=A0 G= ateway. =A0The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag.


A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiac= cess-indicator-03.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/in= ternet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-= koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing= list
I-D-Ann= ounce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/list= info/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.or= g/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

=A0

=

--20cf305640ffcae1f704ba9f59a6-- From Peter.McCann@huawei.com Wed Mar 7 14:20:33 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB2911E80AE for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:20:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xFvLWArUoVhL for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:20:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEFAD11E8074 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id ADW60447; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:20:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from DFWEML407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.132) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:18:46 -0800 Received: from DFWEML504-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.30]) by dfweml407-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.132]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:18:50 +0800 From: Peter McCann To: "telemaco.melia@alcatel-lucent.com" , "sgundave@cisco.com" Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support-04 Thread-Index: Acz8sEVnAgz12r8oSVucATDg6oXf5Q== Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:18:50 +0000 Message-ID: <5963DDF1F751474D8DEEFDCDBEE43AE716448084@dfweml504-mbx> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.193.125.95] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: [netext] Review of draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support-04 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:20:33 -0000 In Taipei I picked up an action item to review the logical interface suppor= t draft. Here are some comments on it. In general, I think you need to consider some of the problems being dealt with in the MIF working group in the context of this document. Mapping=20 IP flows onto physical interfaces is just one of the things that you have to worry about. What if each physical interface is connected to a differen= t provisioning domain? How do you deal with things like multiple sets of DNS servers, or conflicting DHCP options? I am not sure what is gained by using a logical interface as depicted in Figure 5 of Section 6.1. There are two different prefixes here (why are we going back to a single LMA at all in this case?) so you=20 might as well have presented this as two different interfaces to the upper layers. I think the use cases in Section 6.2 and 6.3 were more what the authors had in mind when thinking about this logical interface concept. However, I have a concern: in these cases, you need to know that the two physical interfaces are being routed by the network back to the same LMA. In genera= l, the two technologies may be routed to completely different service provider= s. How does the logical interface manager in the host distinguish these two cases? By its very definition, PMIP does not expose the workings of the network to the host. Are you saying that a given host will only use its WLAN interface in conjunction with a wide-area cellular operator? That doesn't seem very realistic given today's usage models, where I can take my phone into my home and use my home WLAN network. Section 4, I am not sure about your description of the 3GPP link layer. As shown in your protocol stack in Figure 2, there is no PPP, although it is true that the concatenation of PDCP and GTP makes for a point-to-poin= t link. Also, you should make it clear that the random L2 MAC address is only used in the Source Link Layer Address *option* of ND, and not as a true link layer source address (there is no place in the PDCP headers to put such a thing). I believe this address is simply ignored by the PGW since it has a tunnel endpoint associated with the UE. Editorial nits: Section 3.2.1: This type of solution does not typically allow for simultaneous attachment to different access networks, and therefore can only be considered for inter-access technology handovers, but not for flow mobility. I think you meant to say: This type of solution does not typically allow for simultaneous attachment to different access networks, and therefore can only be considered for intra-access technology handovers, and not for flow mobility. In Section 5.6: s/PIF Table/FLOW Table/ -- Peter J. McCann Huawei Technologies (USA) Peter.McCann@Huawei.com +1 908 541 3563 Rm. C-0105, 400 Crossings Blvd. (2nd floor), Bridgewater, NJ 08807-2863 U= SA From rkoodli@cisco.com Wed Mar 7 16:04:26 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22EBD11E80AD for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:04:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -109.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.349, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0DoMo8eEIK-5 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:04:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4259B11E80B0 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:04:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rkoodli@cisco.com; l=8881; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1331165064; x=1332374664; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=4G0tK3A0CtLGapFT79SRhVfeNr7LBgENX1GcNJC/v9U=; b=Q9g7YMlafIl0LTooD1FUbeYNZniSSh/CgbNwxav2Q425Hd8QgdPt/Nym bl9X9XPLUxrIwjAhb/u7JTn9Y/BqI17wlKWLqh0aRTUkeghy0aoixyToH M4J2T/9bEWWumB3ohDpz52p1WKsd0KxXNK5tO7+/WMAZFkyOWfDrlPY06 s=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFALH2V0+tJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABEgkWpUgGIFXqBB4IKAQEBAwEBAQEPASoxEA0BCBEDAQJQBigIAQEEARIJGYdhBQuaXQGee4k5hzYEiB8ziRKDXYshA4RzgwQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,549,1325462400"; d="scan'208,217";a="64668962" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Mar 2012 00:04:18 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com [72.163.62.139]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2804Iqa014534; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 00:04:18 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 7 Mar 2012 18:04:18 -0600 Received: from 10.21.88.94 ([10.21.88.94]) by XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 00:04:18 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.24.0.100205 Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:06:53 -0800 From: Rajeev Koodli To: Hui Deng , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt Thread-Index: Acz8v13Ttvk4U2dreU6/t8aUGNYEMA== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3413981213_17054069" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Mar 2012 00:04:18.0423 (UTC) FILETIME=[01B0F870:01CCFCBF] Subject: Re: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 00:04:26 -0000 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3413981213_17054069 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hi Hui, Thank you for reviewing the draft. 1: I see your point. It=B9s called Multi-access Indicator because it is able to do flow mobility. You can have multiple interfaces but not be =B3able and willing=B2 to do flow mobility 2: You mean that flow mobility indication should be made specific to an APN= ? I like your suggestion - what would be a good use case beyond the =B3default=B2 APN? BTW, have you seen=20 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-valmikam-eap-attributes-wifi-epc-integrati= o n-00 Regards, -Rajeev On 3/6/12 8:11 PM, "Hui Deng" wrote: > Hi Rajeev, > =A0 > I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authentication c= ould > indicate handover, so > 1) maybe handover indicator=A0is better than multiaccess indicator because = UE > connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces > =A0 > 2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension, > without this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong sour= ce > address) > =A0 > thanks a lot for your consideration > =A0 > -Hui >=20 >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: >> Date: 2012/3/3 >> Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >>=20 >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Rajeev Koodli >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jouni Korhonen >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.tx= t >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 8 >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2012-03-02 >>=20 >> =A0 When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple >> =A0 access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to >> =A0 know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access, >> =A0 so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most >> =A0 appropriate interface. =A0This document defines a new EAP attribute >> =A0 which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network >> =A0 Gateway. =A0The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag. >>=20 >>=20 >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indi= cator >> -03.txt >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indic= ator- >> 03.txt >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> Internet-Draft=20 >> >> directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> =A0 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext --B_3413981213_17054069 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-0= 3.txt
Hi Hui,

Thank you for reviewing the draft.

1: I see your point. It’s called Multi-access Indicator because it is= able to do flow mobility. You can have multiple interfaces but not be ̶= 0;able and willing” to do flow mobility

2: You mean that flow mobility indication should be made specific to an APN= ? I like your suggestion - what would be a good use case beyond the “d= efault” APN?

BTW, have you seen http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-valmikam= -eap-attributes-wifi-epc-integration-00

Regards,

-Rajeev



On 3/6/12 8:11 PM, "Hui Deng" <d= enghui02@gmail.com> wrote:

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>Hi Rajeev,
=A0
I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authentication cou= ld indicate handover, so
1) maybe handover indicator=A0is better than multiaccess indicator because UE= connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces
=A0
2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension, wit= hout this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong source add= ress)
=A0
thanks a lot for your consideration
=A0
-Hui

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org&g= t;
Date: 2012/3/3
Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Rajeev Koodli
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jouni Korhonen
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 8
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2012-03-02

=A0 When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple
=A0 access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to
=A0 know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access,
=A0 so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most
=A0 appropriate interface. =A0This document defines a new EAP attribute
=A0 which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network
=A0 Gateway. =A0The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag.


A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-= multiaccess-indicator-03.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-d= rafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-mu= ltiaccess-indicator-03.txt

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-Announce@ietf.org
https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announceInterne= t-Draft>  directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/i= etf/1shadow-sites.txt
=A0
=

___________= ____________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org= /mailman/listinfo/netext
--B_3413981213_17054069-- From sgundave@cisco.com Wed Mar 7 21:55:42 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C49521F8597 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 21:55:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.08 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.08 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.519, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y0+xqD3+aMHw for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 21:55:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 498FF21F8598 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 21:55:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=3236; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1331186141; x=1332395741; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NRPwoDnwEwPCf7Rv2RcNCUisaE7TZ3CZGu78/ZbHtvk=; b=b10WU2/04jjLmHqXVeBfozsnr9CCWOk12sBkQVEjjcNBViEg5Dpbl1WJ reruX1cVv1Px9TyPyoQVU/53jGnrtzKZYOuulytzkgt+iZoiSCZdjo7en vfkoZxevlIhR/7yC5JGvsU41yUTfi8l6AAO9uyIo62z4dWtX64krdgWIE Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EADdJWE+rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABAA7UrgQeCCgEBAQMBEgEnAgEvDQUNAQiBHQEBBAENBRsHh2EEAZp5AZ8TjUeDJwSIUoxvkBeDBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,550,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="32358559" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Mar 2012 05:55:41 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q285tedr026101; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 05:55:41 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 7 Mar 2012 21:55:41 -0800 Received: from 10.32.246.211 ([10.32.246.211]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 05:55:40 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121 Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:55:39 -0800 From: Sri Gundavelli To: Peter McCann , "telemaco.melia@alcatel-lucent.com" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support-04 Thread-Index: Acz8sEVnAgz12r8oSVucATDg6oXf5QAP9FKW In-Reply-To: <5963DDF1F751474D8DEEFDCDBEE43AE716448084@dfweml504-mbx> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Mar 2012 05:55:41.0085 (UTC) FILETIME=[17EFE4D0:01CCFCF0] Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Review of draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support-04 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 05:55:42 -0000 Thanks Pete for the review. We will address these comments. Regards Sri On 3/7/12 2:18 PM, "Peter McCann" wrote: > In Taipei I picked up an action item to review the logical interface support > draft. Here are some comments on it. > > > In general, I think you need to consider some of the problems being dealt > with in the MIF working group in the context of this document. Mapping > IP flows onto physical interfaces is just one of the things that you have > to worry about. What if each physical interface is connected to a different > provisioning domain? How do you deal with things like multiple sets of > DNS servers, or conflicting DHCP options? > > I am not sure what is gained by using a logical interface as depicted > in Figure 5 of Section 6.1. There are two different prefixes here > (why are we going back to a single LMA at all in this case?) so you > might as well have presented this as two different interfaces to the > upper layers. > > I think the use cases in Section 6.2 and 6.3 were more what the authors > had in mind when thinking about this logical interface concept. However, > I have a concern: in these cases, you need to know that the two physical > interfaces are being routed by the network back to the same LMA. In general, > the two technologies may be routed to completely different service providers. > How does the logical interface manager in the host distinguish these two > cases? By its very definition, PMIP does not expose the workings of the > network to the host. Are you saying that a given host will only use its > WLAN interface in conjunction with a wide-area cellular operator? That > doesn't seem very realistic given today's usage models, where I can take > my phone into my home and use my home WLAN network. > > > > Section 4, I am not sure about your description of the 3GPP link layer. > As shown in your protocol stack in Figure 2, there is no PPP, although > it is true that the concatenation of PDCP and GTP makes for a point-to-point > link. Also, you should make it clear that the random L2 MAC address is > only used in the Source Link Layer Address *option* of ND, and not as a > true link layer source address (there is no place in the PDCP headers to > put such a thing). I believe this address is simply ignored by the PGW > since it has a tunnel endpoint associated with the UE. > > > Editorial nits: > > Section 3.2.1: > This type of solution does not typically allow for simultaneous > attachment to different access networks, and therefore can only be > considered for inter-access technology handovers, but not for flow > mobility. > I think you meant to say: > This type of solution does not typically allow for simultaneous > attachment to different access networks, and therefore can only be > considered for intra-access technology handovers, and not for flow > mobility. > > In Section 5.6: s/PIF Table/FLOW Table/ > > > > -- > Peter J. McCann > Huawei Technologies (USA) > Peter.McCann@Huawei.com > +1 908 541 3563 > Rm. C-0105, 400 Crossings Blvd. (2nd floor), Bridgewater, NJ 08807-2863 USA > > From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Fri Mar 9 10:32:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F5AD21F8712 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:32:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.886 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.363, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OtLx9AdZDX9s for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:32:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A438B21F86F6 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:32:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id q29IWNer024704 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 19:32:23 +0100 Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q29IWMlW013362; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 19:32:22 +0100 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id q29IWJFY024640; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 19:32:22 +0100 Message-ID: <4F5A4CB3.7050309@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 19:32:19 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sri Gundavelli References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] New draft draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 18:32:27 -0000 Sri, Le 07/03/2012 02:18, Sri Gundavelli a écrit : > Alex: > > - DHCP PD is the protocol interface that we have with the mobile > router. It is good that DHCP PD is the protocol used to allocate prefixes. > - The allocate prefix, if done by DHCP server, or LMA, I believe draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip makes PMIP allocate the prefix (and not DHCP), because draft says: > If the MAG does not know the delegated prefix, then mobile network > prefix in the MNP option MUST be set to unspecified address "::" and > prefix length to 0. The LMA either assigns the MR a new delegated > prefix or returns an existing one. Remark it does not say what happens whether the MAG _does_ know the delegated prefix, or whether it learned it somehow. > needs to be managed in the BCE, as there is routing state and > mobility associated with that. So, PMIP does allocate the prefix in > some sense. In some sense. Allocating a prefix is a different operation than setting up routing state and BCE associated with it. Allocating involves managing a pool of available prefixes such that same MNP is allocated uniquely to a unique MR. Setting up routing state is about inserting data in a table. Basically, (1) the DHCP Server can allocate the prefix and inform the LMA to update routing, or (2) LMA can allocate prefix, set up routing, and inform DHCP Server about that prefix (I don't know why would it do it). > - If we look at MNP's as a set of prefixes, and HNP's as a set of > prefixes, if they are aggregatable to a single larger prefix, or if > they belong to a non-contiguous space is more about assignment > policy. It's not assignment policy. It is possible to derive an MNP by dividing the HNP that is allocated by PMIP and thus not demand the use of DHCPv6 - just do 5213 PMIP and modify a little the MR. This is what a part of draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemmo proposes, and draft-ietf-netext-pmip-pd doesn't. It is also possible to have completely different prefixes HNP and MNP (leftmost bit flipped) and this is what allocation with DHCP PD allows (also proposed by draft-petrescu-pmip-nemo and not allowed by draft-ietf-netext-pmip-pd). > So, may be its the same. In a sense, yes, like when looking at from a distance. And let us look more in detail. Alex > > > Regards Sri > > > > On 3/6/12 12:43 PM, "Alexandru > Petrescu" wrote: > >> Sri, >> >> Thank you for the question. There are two basic differences: >> >> The WG document on PD assumes that PMIP allocates the prefix, >> whereas this draft assumes DHCP allocates it. >> >> The WG document does not describe a method of dividing the HNP in >> order to obtain an MNP, whereas this draft does. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Alex >> >> Le 06/03/2012 01:35, Sri Gundavelli a écrit : >>> Hi Alex: >>> >>> Question. How is this draft different from the WG document on PD >>> ? >>> >>> Regards Sri >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/5/12 1:24 PM, "Alexandru >>> Petrescu" wrote: >>> >>>> Hello netext participants, >>>> >>>> We have submitted a short Internet Draft: >>>> >>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-00 >>>> >>>> It treats of moving networks within a PMIPv6 domain. It >>>> offers two alternative mechanisms: >>>> >>>> - HNP Division - PMIPv6 is not modified, HNP is divided into >>>> two or more MNPs. - Enhancements to PMIPv6 and DHCPv6-PD - Q >>>> bit, DHCP allocates MNP whereas PMIP is just informed >>>> (DUID=MNID). >>>> >>>> We are interested in discussion about this draft. The text is >>>> relatively brief now but we can offer clarification depending >>>> on interest. >>>> >>>> Yours, >>>> >>>> Alex _______________________________________________ netext >>>> mailing list netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>> >>> >> > > From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Mar 9 12:57:10 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B81121F85AE for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:57:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.054 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.054 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.545, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AdKG++-CM1AR for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:57:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mgw-sa01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A68B921F8517 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:57:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (in-mx.nokia.com [10.160.244.32]) by mgw-sa01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id q29Kuju2005798; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 22:57:06 +0200 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.56]) by vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 22:56:46 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-073.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.3.150]) by 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.56]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.003; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 21:56:45 +0100 From: To: Thread-Topic: Localized routing I-D in the DIME WG Thread-Index: AQHM/jcjEYqCcHasDkOtb8v4ZKlgTg== Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 20:56:45 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 x-originating-ip: [72.64.105.193] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <8DCC26A357FC91439D1876DDEFB317EE@mgd.nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2012 20:56:46.0441 (UTC) FILETIME=[23D04590:01CCFE37] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: draft-ietf-dime-pmip6-lr@tools.ietf.org, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: [netext] Localized routing I-D in the DIME WG X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 20:57:10 -0000 Hello, I just wanted to highlight the following I-D: Diameter Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Localized Routing to the Netext WG members. The Netext WG has defined the localized routing problem statement in RFC6279 and a solution for LR in I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pmip-lr. The Netext localized routing solution I-D has completed WGLC and IETF LC and is currently in IESG evaluation. The DIME WG I-D on localized routing also is in the localized routing solution space. This I-D is also in IESG evaluation at this time. We would like to make the WG members aware of this DIME I-D. We would encourage Netext WG members to review and provided comments and feedback directly to the IESG, DIME WG or the I-D authors. -Chairs From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Mar 9 13:11:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3809F21E8038 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 13:11:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.157 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.157 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.442, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id st7lB-oNNNkp for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 13:11:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5198221F86AD for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 13:11:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (in-mx.nokia.com [10.160.244.30]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id q29LBHJh016312 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 23:11:18 +0200 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.21]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 23:11:16 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-073.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.3.150]) by 008-AM1MMR1-012.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.21]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.003; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 22:11:16 +0100 From: To: Thread-Topic: Draft agenda of WG meeting at IETF83 Thread-Index: AQHM/jkppsTiUTbVWUe8Kv3tQoP7XQ== Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 21:11:15 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 x-originating-ip: [72.64.105.193] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2012 21:11:16.0688 (UTC) FILETIME=[2A856D00:01CCFE39] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Draft agenda of WG meeting at IETF83 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 21:11:20 -0000 Please see below the draft agenda for the WG meeting. If I have missed any requests for agenda slots, please do send me an email. Thx. -Chairs Rev: 1 Network-Based Mobility Extensions (NetExt) WG meeting WEDNESDAY, March 28, 2012 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I (253) ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Logistics (Bluesheets, minutes takers, jabber, agenda bashing) 5 mins 2. WG Status update Chairs 5 Mins 3. Logical Interface Support for multi-mode IP Hosts 5 Mins I-D: draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support Sri Gundavelli 4. Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility 10 Mins I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob CJ Bernardos 5. Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6 10 Mins I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip Carl Williams Proposals for consideration: 1. PMIPv6 and Network Mobility Problem Statement 10 Mins I-D: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps CJ Bernardos 2. Quality of Service Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 15 Mins I-D: draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos M. Liebsch 3. Applicability of PMIP6 Protocol for WLAN Access Networks 10 Mins I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-wlan-applicability S. Gundavelli 4. Multiple APN Support for Trusted Wireless LAN Access 10 Mins I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-multiple-apn-pmipv6 Hui Deng 5. PMIPv6 inter-working with WiFi access authentication 10 Mins I-D: draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-authiwk S. Gundavelli Remote participation info: - via Meetecho=20 (see http://ietf83.conf.meetecho.com/) - via audio streaming (see http://www.ietf.org/meeting/83/remote-participation.html#audio) Presentation slides will be available 2 hours prior to the meeting at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/83/materials.html (Under Netext in the Internet area) From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sun Mar 11 10:00:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4A121F87B0 for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:00:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.247 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.247 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.352, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ok9-EmhUdmgw for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:00:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36B1C21F877A for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:00:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (in-mx.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id q2BH0kFF013765 for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:00:46 +0200 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.59]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:00:45 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-073.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.3.150]) by 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.59]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.003; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:00:44 +0100 From: To: Thread-Topic: Rev 2 of agenda posted Thread-Index: AQHM/6h/iLVD5ShD0kq4UYI90Wr2cw== Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 17:00:44 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 x-originating-ip: [72.64.105.193] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2012 17:00:45.0564 (UTC) FILETIME=[80196BC0:01CCFFA8] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Rev 2 of agenda posted X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 17:00:49 -0000 http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/agenda/agenda-83-netext.txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Mar 12 04:08:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8613921F8573; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 04:08:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.576 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.576 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20MmsFJ-4eCp; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 04:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE0521F84F2; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 04:08:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120312110854.6069.56149.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 04:08:54 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-02.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:08:54 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Network-Based Mobility Extensions Wor= king Group of the IETF. Title : Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Author(s) : Xingyue Zhou Jouni Korhonen Carl Williams Sri Gundavelli Carlos J. Bernardos Filename : draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-02.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2012-03-12 Proxy Mobile IPv6 enables IP mobility for a host without requiring its participation in any mobility signaling, being the network responsible for managing IP mobility on behalf of the host. However, Proxy Mobile IPv6 does not support assigning a prefix to a router and managing its IP mobility. This document specifies an extension to Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol for supporting network mobility using DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-02.txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Mar 12 12:48:35 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4379521E80A5; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:48:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.582 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.582 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.017, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0hM6li7XDGbg; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:48:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D142B21E80B1; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:48:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120312194834.8308.58159.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:48:34 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:48:35 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Network-Based Mobility Extensions Wor= king Group of the IETF. Title : Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility Author(s) : Carlos J. Bernardos Filename : draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2012-03-12 Proxy Mobile IPv6 allows a mobile node to connect to the same Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain through different interfaces. However, the ability of movement of selected flows from one access technology to another is missing in the basic Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol. This document describes extensions to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol that are required to support network based flow mobility over multiple physical interfaces. This document assumes that the mobile node implements the logical interface model, therefore allowing the support of traffic flows on different physical interfaces regardless of the assigned prefixes on these physical interfaces. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03.txt From Marco.Liebsch@neclab.eu Tue Mar 13 08:40:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8954921F8954 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:40:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GPJJLQX39j7O for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A585921F894F for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:40:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E35DC100899 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:40:50 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z2FuQwNmZTMC for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:40:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from ENCELADUS.office.hd (unknown [192.168.24.52]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81F2100883 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:40:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from DAPHNIS.office.hd ([169.254.2.41]) by ENCELADUS.office.hd ([192.168.24.52]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:40:27 +0100 From: Marco Liebsch To: "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos-01.txt Thread-Index: Ac0BLrfJDA4oGJmRTXyJExWUxpScgQ== Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:40:27 +0000 Message-ID: <69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D24D74992@DAPHNIS.office.hd> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.1.6.1] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D24D74992DAPHNISofficehd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [netext] New Version Notification for draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos-01.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:40:34 -0000 --_000_69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D24D74992DAPHNISofficehd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please find an update of our draft about a QoS option for PMIP6 on the IETF= repository, which addresses comments from last meeting. The current version includes more det= ails about the proposed operation and QoS attributes. Marco Filename: draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos Revision: 01 Title: Quality of Service Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Creation date: 2012-03-12 WG ID: Individual Submission Number of pages: 32 Link: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos-01.txt Abstract: This specification defines a new mobility option that can be used by the mobility entities in the Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain to exchange Quality of Service parameters associated with a subscriber's IP flows. Using the QoS option, the local mobility anchor and the mobile access gateway can exchange available QoS attributes and associated values. This enables QoS policing and labeling of packets to enforce QoS differentiation on the path between the local mobility anchor and the mobile access gateway. Furthermore, making QoS parameters available on the MAG enables mapping these parameters to QoS rules being specific to the access technology which operates below the mobile access gateway. After such mapping, QoS rules can be enforced on the access technology components, such as an IEEE 802.11e Wireless LAN controller. --_000_69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D24D74992DAPHNISofficehd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Please find an update of our draft about a QoS optio= n for PMIP6 on the IETF repository, which
addresses comments from last meeting. The current version includes more det= ails about the
proposed operation and QoS attributes.

 

Marco

 

Filename:   &nbs= p;        draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos=

Revision:      &nbs= p;       01

Title:       &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;  Quality of Service Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Creation date:   2012-03-12<= /p>

WG ID:       &= nbsp;          Individual Subm= ission

Number of pages: 32

Link: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos-01.txt=

 

Abstract:

   This specification defines a new mob= ility option that can be used by

   the mobility entities in the Proxy M= obile IPv6 domain to exchange

   Quality of Service parameters associ= ated with a subscriber&#39;s IP

   flows.  Using the QoS option, t= he local mobility anchor and the

   mobile access gateway can exchange a= vailable QoS attributes and

   associated values.  This enable= s QoS policing and labeling of packets

   to enforce QoS differentiation on th= e path between the local mobility

   anchor and the mobile access gateway= .  Furthermore, making QoS

   parameters available on the MAG enab= les mapping these parameters to

   QoS rules being specific to the acce= ss technology which operates

   below the mobile access gateway.&nbs= p; After such mapping, QoS rules can

   be enforced on the access technology= components, such as an IEEE

   802.11e Wireless LAN controller.

 

 

--_000_69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D24D74992DAPHNISofficehd_-- From sarikaya2012@gmail.com Wed Mar 14 10:32:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B23C21E8024; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:32:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.561 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cv8NqWwIYFmc; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3C5721F876F; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by eaaq11 with SMTP id q11so1225066eaa.31 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:31:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=HN2j7MaT2UlhlkYtMZWKHrnueNcLQKQ9zKss7lre2so=; b=NgH+gXNtD/Cg45cNUrn6ivsWAORjHvPIDdXpequ7PMreQwNLssGAFZK2nTwvtXgURo JT1lm7G40itiG213prFJ4qVsEwcnYnWCIbCHNx5m/+2tDp0JIocR+X2i3eXKzfOv79eZ ++Uk5BsOzu4WpraYOlNSzQ2gS0UqQ0SJQ16tjpJ7elc9nOn7yFXYBzpfQXAtjrvW0zkJ PTL+av72T6VxTBygp9aHfm7J6i4lUkYUgDkxUmkvY524KNot2t8dm75eawCAShUxVRBH GYASltmRnqGCSUhfL4b07NLidPLBsJo9ST7LknQE5OyJV8ZKxuVKp5I7AB+ll7MoLMiB Y5PQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.193.131 with SMTP id ho3mr12922385igc.55.1331746315934; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.179.71 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:31:55 -0500 Message-ID: From: Behcet Sarikaya To: Internet Area , dmm@ietf.org, netext@ietf.org, mip4@ietf.org, multimob@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [netext] FMC Bar Bof Date Correction X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:32:00 -0000 Hi all, Our previous mail on March 6 announcing FMC Bar Bof had by mistake the date as March 28. Tuesday March 27 at 19:30 or 7:30pm is the correct one. We are going to send another mail once this is confirmed by IETF. Sorry for the confusion and thanks to Wassim, Med, Sophie for waking us up :-). Behcet ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi all, FMC Problem Statement draft draft-xue-intarea-fmc-ps-00.txt has been submitted as below. We also requested a slot for holding FMC Bar Bof tentatively on Tuesday, March 28 at 19:30. If you have a presentation to make please drop a note to us. Regards, Behcet & Dirk From denghui02@gmail.com Wed Mar 21 00:52:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D9421F867A for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:52:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.356 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.356 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.242, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id me-YzKS3nJhp for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D17221F862F for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yhkk25 with SMTP id k25so765794yhk.31 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:52:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8sFB4D3RAdxpFpiCRhJwjRLCSc2a8AD0jzxpp/bY8B4=; b=m+FsEZYeOk1vbdrZtFJGjxiHf1Om1QwARXdDBDBXPjtazC0wsYzd+Dd/TLsMmj1iHe WOfnVDxt2eLzsvMbfnD6/kwk774nzvTA7STyTSL+lfqAczj4fujwmihhLXoOsKyT+YON T+LpiuA85UpqkU4qtPlpY8FoF8jYI3TB6rMJ3I3H2bbXabLgkoxjO9cIehW99CvT3s/C m1gzBWenQWOEbYiFeWuOrx+I86SImvgIAvBJnfhj2pti1dUF7dqJnGCyCj5okmOcuv9o o99/qSzHUife7kr90R1SQOp05sKHfdFWGWfPo973MMOrWpHDkStIEgBYPmNewEtanWGs RrVA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.134.211 with SMTP id s59mr2684893yhi.131.1332316348438; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.147.112.1 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:52:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:52:28 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: Rajeev Koodli Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf303a2b73ad58fd04bbbc12aa Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:52:30 -0000 --20cf303a2b73ad58fd04bbbc12aa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Rajeev, Excuse me for coming back late, 1. I see your point, in the current draft, it only says logical interface, would better to describe how really means of that, for example, you may need implement virtual interface which take over all the interfaces. 2. One apn is future, today there are still multiple APNs 3. Where you would like to discuss your EAP draft? I have read it, would like to comment on it. Best -Hui 2012/3/8 Rajeev Koodli > > Hi Hui, > > Thank you for reviewing the draft. > > 1: I see your point. It=92s called Multi-access Indicator because it is a= ble > to do flow mobility. You can have multiple interfaces but not be =93able = and > willing=94 to do flow mobility > > 2: You mean that flow mobility indication should be made specific to an > APN? I like your suggestion - what would be a good use case beyond the > =93default=94 APN? > > BTW, have you seen > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-valmikam-eap-attributes-wifi-epc-integra= tion-00 > > Regards, > > -Rajeev > > > > > On 3/6/12 8:11 PM, "Hui Deng" wrote: > > Hi Rajeev, > > I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authentication > could indicate handover, so > 1) maybe handover indicator is better than multiaccess indicator because > UE connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces > > 2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension, > without this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong sour= ce > address) > > thanks a lot for your consideration > > -Hui > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: > Date: 2012/3/3 > Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility > Author(s) : Rajeev Koodli > Jouni Korhonen > Filename : draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt > Pages : 8 > Date : 2012-03-02 > > When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple > access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to > know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access, > so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most > appropriate interface. This document defines a new EAP attribute > which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network > Gateway. The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag. > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indic= ator-03.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indica= tor-03.txt > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft < > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announceInternet-Draft> > directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > ------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > --20cf303a2b73ad58fd04bbbc12aa Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Rajeev,
=A0
Excuse me for coming back late,
=A0
1. I see your point, in the current draft, it only says logical interf= ace, would better to describe how really means of that, for example, you ma= y need implement virtual interface which take over all the interfaces.
=A0
2. One apn is future, today there are still multiple APNs
3. Where you would like to discuss your EAP draft? I have read it, wou= ld like to comment on it.
=A0
Best
=A0
-Hui
2012/3/8 Rajeev Koodli <rkoodli@cisco.com>

Hi Hui,

Thank you for reviewing the draft.

1: = I see your point. It=92s called Multi-access Indicator because it is able t= o do flow mobility. You can have multiple interfaces but not be =93able and= willing=94 to do flow mobility

2: You mean that flow mobility indication should be made specific to an= APN? I like your suggestion - what would be a good use case beyond the =93= default=94 APN?

BTW, have you seen http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-valmikam-eap-attributes-wifi-epc-integr= ation-00

Regards,

-Rajeev=20




On 3/6/12 8:11 PM, "Hui Deng" &= lt;denghui02@gmail= .com> wrote:
Hi Rajeev,
=A0
I have comments on your draft,= you are assuming wifi eap authentication could indicate handover, so
1= ) maybe handover indicator=A0is better than multiaccess indicator because U= E connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces
=A0
2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extensi= on, without this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong so= urce address)
=A0
thanks a lot for your consideration
=A0
-Hui<= br>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <internet-drafts@i= etf.org>
Date: 2012/3/3
Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-nete= xt-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt
To: i-d-announce= @ietf.org



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-= line Internet-Drafts directories.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Rajeev Koodli
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jouni Korhonen
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt
=A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 8
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0: 2012-03-02

=A0 When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple=A0 access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to
= =A0 know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access, =A0 so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most
= =A0 appropriate interface. =A0This document defines a new EAP attribute
= =A0 which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network
=A0 G= ateway. =A0The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag.


A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiac= cess-indicator-03.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/in= ternet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-= koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing= list
I-D-Ann= ounce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-annou= nce
Internet-Draft <https://www.ietf.org/mai= lman/listinfo/i-d-announceInternet-Draft> =A0directories: http://www.ietf.org/sha= dow.html
or = ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
=A0


_______________________________________________
ne= text mailing list
n= etext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

--20cf303a2b73ad58fd04bbbc12aa-- From rkoodli@cisco.com Thu Mar 22 15:59:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194EC21E801B for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:59:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -109.435 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.233, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YBAK7BFK26a4 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:59:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF2421E800F for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:59:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12206; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1332457173; x=1333666773; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=yqqPgyIdmftdw7WjL/eWir2EkMbs0lGhIABW82KYpwA=; b=BJi9XbbJcREO96arEfnI1qL94bn3PLAuVCIOEOfchFhvy3S7wvWIKiHn y0WrH2tteLSJloXvR5iufCiBeTFycRbhK26QARyr+BKYlP7D+9UdKVNxL 2gViTb3A2haWkJVL+IT6SwKnBxatMIX/aGLPZp21ykxY4Ddaa1SB7Szld w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgQFAFCua0+tJXHA/2dsb2JhbABDgk+jaYgdAYdzfYEHggkBAQEDAQEBAQ8BKjELBQ0BCBEDAQIBTwYoCAEBBA4FCRmHYwULnniXJIlthncEiCMziSWDZIslCgODDoFogwc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,633,1325462400"; d="scan'208,217";a="65719022" Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Mar 2012 22:59:32 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2MMxWi6005847; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:59:32 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:59:32 -0500 Received: from 10.21.93.10 ([10.21.93.10]) by XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:59:31 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.24.0.100205 Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:02:54 -0700 From: Rajeev Koodli To: Hui Deng Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt Thread-Index: Ac0If+nM5XKlog+UvU2qt+d4gzqaqw== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3415276974_19707241" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Mar 2012 22:59:32.0006 (UTC) FILETIME=[71670C60:01CD087F] Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:59:36 -0000 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3415276974_19707241 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hi Hui, On 3/21/12 12:52 AM, "Hui Deng" wrote: > Hi Rajeev, > =A0 > Excuse me for coming back late, >=20 > Rajeev:> No problem. > =A0 > 1. I see your point, in the current draft, it only says logical interface= , > would better to describe how really means of that, for example, you may n= eed > implement virtual interface which take over all the interfaces. >=20 > Rajeev:> There is a NetExt ID dedicated for describing the Logical Interf= ace. > That=B9s a good place for such a description. IMO. > =A0 > 2. One apn is future, today there are still multiple APNs >=20 > Rajeev:> The design should support =8C>1 APN=B9, so that it can support =8C=3D1 A= PN=B9 >=20 > 3. Where you would like to discuss your EAP draft? I have read it, would = like > to comment on it. >=20 > Rajeev:> NetExt is a good place. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 > -Rajeev > =A0 > Best > =A0 > -Hui > 2012/3/8 Rajeev Koodli >>=20 >> Hi Hui, >>=20 >> Thank you for reviewing the draft. >>=20 >> 1: I see your point. It=B9s called Multi-access Indicator because it is ab= le to >> do flow mobility. You can have multiple interfaces but not be =B3able and >> willing=B2 to do flow mobility >>=20 >> 2: You mean that flow mobility indication should be made specific to an = APN? >> I like your suggestion - what would be a good use case beyond the =B3defau= lt=B2 >> APN? >>=20 >> BTW, have you seen >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-valmikam-eap-attributes-wifi-epc-integr= ation >> -00 >>=20 >> Regards, >>=20 >> -Rajeev=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On 3/6/12 8:11 PM, "Hui Deng" > > wrote: >>=20 >>> Hi Rajeev, >>> =A0 >>> I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authentication >>> could indicate handover, so >>> 1) maybe handover indicator=A0is better than multiaccess indicator becaus= e UE >>> connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces >>> =A0 >>> 2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension, >>> without this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong so= urce >>> address) >>> =A0 >>> thanks a lot for your consideration >>> =A0 >>> -Hui >>>=20 >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: > >>>> Date: 2012/3/3 >>>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt >>>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>>> directories. >>>>=20 >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Rajeev Koodli >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jouni Korhonen >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.= txt >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 8 >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2012-03-02 >>>>=20 >>>> =A0 When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple >>>> =A0 access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to >>>> =A0 know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access= , >>>> =A0 so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most >>>> =A0 appropriate interface. =A0This document defines a new EAP attribute >>>> =A0 which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network >>>> =A0 Gateway. =A0The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-in= dicat >>>> or-03.txt >>>>=20 >>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>>>=20 >>>> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: >>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-ind= icato >>>> r-03.txt >>>>=20 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>>> Internet-Draft >>>> >>>> =A0directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>>> =A0 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >=20 >=20 --B_3415276974_19707241 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [netext] Comments on draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-0= 3.txt
Hi Hui,

On 3/21/12 12:52 AM, "Hui Deng" <denghui02@gmail.com> wrote:

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>Hi Rajeev,
=A0
Excuse me for coming back late,

Rajeev:> No problem.
=A0
1. I see your point, in the current draft, it only says logical interface, = would better to describe how really means of that, for example, you may need= implement virtual interface which take over all the interfaces.

Rajeev:> There is a NetExt ID dedicated for describing the Logical Inter= face. That’s a good place for such a description. IMO.
=A0
2. One apn is future, today there are still multiple APNs

Rajeev:> The design should support ‘>1 APN’, so that it c= an support ‘=3D1 APN’

3. Where you would like to discuss your EAP draft? I have read it, would li= ke to comment on it.

Rajeev:> NetExt is a good place.

Thanks.

-Rajeev
=A0
Best
=A0
-Hui
2012/3/8 Rajeev Koodli <rkoodli@cisco.com>
<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>
Hi Hui,

Thank you for reviewing the draft.

1: I see your point. It’s called Multi-access Indicator because it is= able to do flow mobility. You can have multiple interfaces but not be ̶= 0;able and willing” to do flow mobility

2: You mean that flow mobility indication should be made specific to an APN= ? I like your suggestion - what would be a good use case beyond the “d= efault” APN?

BTW, have you seen http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-valmikam= -eap-attributes-wifi-epc-integration-00

Regards,

-Rajeev




On 3/6/12 8:11 PM, "Hui Deng" <d= enghui02@gmail.com <http://dengh= ui02@gmail.com> > wrote:

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>Hi Rajeev,
=A0
I have comments on your draft, you are assuming wifi eap authentication cou= ld indicate handover, so
1) maybe handover indicator=A0is better than multiaccess indicator because UE= connect to WIFI and need handover, it has already two interfaces
=A0
2) I recommend you could support APN information in your eap extension, wit= hout this information such indicatotion may lead wrong APN (wrong source add= ress)
=A0
thanks a lot for your consideration
=A0
-Hui

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org &= lt;http://internet-drafts@ietf.org= > >
Date: 2012/3/3
Subject: I-D Action: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org <http://i-d-announce@ietf.org>



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Multi-access Indicator for Mobility
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Rajeev Koodli
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jouni Korhonen
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-koodli-netext-multiaccess-indicator-03.txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 8
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2012-03-02

=A0 When a Mobile Node attaches to the mobile network using multiple
=A0 access networks, it is important for the Mobile Network Gateway to
=A0 know whether the Mobile Node is capable of simultaneous multi-access,
=A0 so that the former can distribute the traffic flows using the most
=A0 appropriate interface. =A0This document defines a new EAP attribute
=A0 which can be used for such an indication to the Mobile Network
=A0 Gateway. =A0The document also reserves a new MIP6-Feature-Vector flag.


A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-= multiaccess-indicator-03.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-d= rafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-koodli-netext-mu= ltiaccess-indicator-03.txt

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-Announce@ietf.org <http://I-D-Announce@ietf.org>
https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announceInterne= t-Draft> =A0directories: http= ://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/i= etf/1shadow-sites.txt
=A0
=

___________= ____________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org <http://netext@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org= /mailman/listinfo/netext


--B_3415276974_19707241-- From sarikaya2012@gmail.com Fri Mar 23 08:55:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8AF21F8597; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:55:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.568 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id npiY2egdMBc1; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:55:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0E621F857A; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:55:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iazz13 with SMTP id z13so5679491iaz.31 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:55:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=y3PclEIu+XdLv3VPjFNOHZs0r8+OsImn+z/SUtUDkkk=; b=XH5ViN806RBefSL8L5PQ8PCtSglJEuQl0NHbJ05XcBGVWqc8mGNT8IpYuAUsVP1Gbf 5dvjV86/n9TJQf8iL7PIwYqVDprwRIIZUlR7pNEZB1Bu6rZvtdaL1ZXw1bb118aPD2qk XR98i/FeeLcC+caOm41cDCLC/f0s92PiJ9lxDoo1/NOMs8AnvYmLAl9tsEz2fV5ssWgE /CnWX1ySzquhrTEh+70ikPYy7enOht3K6KwLR+FFWlB8ySEg8saH72JxEMV+jfN+Zk4W qnhJmlsi5Da+WJGDYW6JqbiNbP9nBT3cLj3fHNw3Dy8yznbKVqYnJf6RfodndN4dazXP AUlw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.189.129 with SMTP id gi1mr2551299igc.16.1332518131809; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:55:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.179.71 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:55:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:55:31 -0500 Message-ID: From: Behcet Sarikaya To: Internet Area Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: netext@ietf.org, mip4@ietf.org, multimob@ietf.org, dmm@ietf.org Subject: [netext] FMC Side Meeting Announcement X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:55:37 -0000 Side meeting on Fixed Mobile Convergence will take place on Thursday March 29, 2012 from 18:10 to 20:00 at room 212-213. The agenda and materials are posted at: http://www-etud.iro.umontreal.ca/~sarikaya/fmc/fmc.html Come and join us in this meeting. Behcet & Dirk From sarikaya2012@gmail.com Sun Mar 25 13:41:09 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBCE21E801B; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:41:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.569 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gD7Ca-8Az6OK; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A91E321E801A; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iazz13 with SMTP id z13so8527345iaz.31 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:41:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=rm5Ri9JI8gtkv5QlDwhU9Y8LU4mFzLqS4ANJdv+qAF4=; b=ZHSaz6+K0+qNKZJ6spN0cPIL5q+Ghg+Wf4N19NKGD+G+eDYA5c0dj/qTyk6VY+VuhJ LZg/sbCQVOO9au0Au6tmmRjbi4Gm8CTZzOo1G0Rxuh87OYvDzJXKScdUQmjZ2AjLlA/z umk49ryUg0jEbtm17kpKrDYH7TaHJZYvPrcn1XK4s5VWnnOQKSrj3kla/lIhjjJ9dC/8 RhHZ0RdvcRuegH+Cok+IGlKxikBMMugC3i39VPB1j106MCZOivpeJW8ul2cFH2yfDnYf O1Z9/XLJGWCmb9EzlAg7cQoM8898XvxkWr9wON5Co24R2xRrEKjTXAsk49NEBpoa+667 6I0w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.203.99 with SMTP id kp3mr3951191igc.16.1332708068305; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.179.71 with HTTP; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 15:41:08 -0500 Message-ID: From: Behcet Sarikaya To: Internet Area Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: netext@ietf.org, mip4@ietf.org, multimob@ietf.org, dmm@ietf.org Subject: [netext] FMC Final Date & Time: Tuesday X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 20:41:09 -0000 IETF could not find us an appropriate room so as a result we will hold FMC meeting at the original time. Details are below: Tuesday March 27 at 19:30 or 7:30 Meet at Hotel Concorde Lobby Take a look at the materials at the link given below. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote: > Side meeting on Fixed Mobile Convergence will take place on Thursday > March 29, 2012 > from 18:10 to 20:00 at room 212-213. > > The agenda and materials are posted at: > http://www-etud.iro.umontreal.ca/~sarikaya/fmc/fmc.html > > Come and join us in this meeting. Behcet & Dirk From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Mon Mar 26 03:56:55 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C6B821F85A2 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 03:56:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qe6fOjG3ew4q for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 03:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-sa01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D00521F8549 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 03:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh102.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.23]) by mgw-sa01.nokia.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q2QAulgA001578 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:56:48 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.21]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:55:58 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-073.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.3.150]) by 008-AM1MMR1-012.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.21]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.003; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:55:58 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Seeking volunteers to be the Jabber scribe and minutes taker Thread-Index: AQHNCz8F9uY6f969DU6awkISoA1rSQ== Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:55:57 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 x-originating-ip: [130.129.17.117] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Mar 2012 10:55:58.0618 (UTC) FILETIME=[06A8BFA0:01CD0B3F] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Seeking volunteers to be the Jabber scribe and minutes taker X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:56:55 -0000 Please drop me a note if you are willing to be a volunteer for the Nexext WG meeting (Wednesday afternoon). -Raj From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Tue Mar 27 07:43:24 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6033421F8988 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:43:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sSxGyhoeERdr for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF6C21F8948 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by werb10 with SMTP id b10so5972816wer.31 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:43:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VATVjZsoxZDbyXszKh3jwxFBtkx/InXw8E9WN6tSRUQ=; b=C+4JvhEoY6u4ER8eN4bBxoTBym+bgpEABGN6y9qqJ78abZ4k/o9P0xiGzAoaYS/dQP MWj+n4uHVaD0NA4xh9u8r2axuijkHK8Z1LfBD3FkiY4Alq6jTaqYTtMTAhdXRQCAWc3R OHmPqcitmKIJ/U6nJBZZ/zc1uPsZTDuhyVanDaALQhJjOizkslOCSWpCf48xqx7VbcDI lJLNWzTE0UrLvRgP5HsrJDgyBhAt5ZqARLY2LdPhNUgiKKN8r6c8DoT/wvLgRF5Sc2fH 17wFGAXcBAD+WHsbzm5dBJqFyMtjshFFFWD8QO3HGFmozCezqud9M2ZhH/acuuSYdTWv YEHA== Received: by 10.216.132.140 with SMTP id o12mr14709044wei.67.1332859402436; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [130.129.22.135] (dhcp-1687.meeting.ietf.org. [130.129.22.135]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k7sm68304wia.5.2012.03.27.07.43.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:43:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F71D203.6020401@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:43:15 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [netext] on draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-02.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:43:24 -0000 Is the goal of this draft to achieve network mobility with PMIPv6? If so it should say so, rather than "PD for PMIPv6". Because PD could be used for PMIPv6 to acquire the HNP not the MNP, and hence just host mobility. It is possible to realize network mobility with PMIPv6 without PD - divide the allocated HNP into several MNPs and an address. This draft does not cover this method. Why does this draft impose co-locating the LMA with a DHCPv6 Server? I think they should be separated. Pure DHCPv6-PD can work ok when LMA and DHCPv6 Server are separated. > 3. Upon receiving the DHCPv6 SOLICIT message, the MAG sends a PBU > message including a Mobile Network Prefix (MNP) mobility option as > defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC3963] to the LMA. But how does MAG know the MNP at this time? I believe it doesn't. I think there is an issue here. > The LMA either assigns the MR a new delegated prefix or returns an > existing one. I think throughout the draft only DHCPv6 Server assigns a new delegated prefix, right? (never the LMA, nor the LMA software). > 4. On reception of the PBU the LMA returns the assigned prefix in > the MNP option carried by a Proxy Binding Acknowledgment (PBA) to > the MAG, But I thought the MNP is put in a DHCPv6 message, not a PBA, right? > o On receiving a packet from the bi-directional tunnel established > with the MR's LMA, the MAG MUST first decapsulate the packet > (removing the outer header) and then use the destination address of > the (inner) packet to forward it on the interface through which the > destination MNP is reachable. This would work _only_ if MAG adds a route for the MNP towards the HoA. This should be specified. Otherwise it doesn't work. > After handover to the new target MAG, a PBU message including the > assigned mobile network prefix (if available) MUST be sent from the > new target MAG to the LMA There is an improvement to achieve this: use the DHCPv6 CONFIRM message. > o On receiving a packet from a correspondent node with the > destination address matching the MR's MNP(s) the LMA MUST forward the > packet through the bi-directional tunnel set up for the MR. What do you mean by "matching"? Alex From ietf@meetecho.com Tue Mar 27 07:46:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9FE721E821B for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:46:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.903 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.184, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DIv5XV+KtR6T for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtplq03.aruba.it (smtplqs-out29.aruba.it [62.149.158.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E445C21E81E5 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:46:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 12069 invoked by uid 89); 27 Mar 2012 14:46:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp8.aruba.it) (62.149.158.228) by smtplq03.aruba.it with SMTP; 27 Mar 2012 14:46:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 19159 invoked by uid 89); 27 Mar 2012 14:46:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?130.129.21.177?) (ietf@meetecho.com@130.129.21.177) by smtp8.ad.aruba.it with SMTP; 27 Mar 2012 14:46:26 -0000 Message-ID: <4F71D2C1.1070500@meetecho.com> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:46:25 +0200 From: Meetecho IETF support User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: smtp8.ad.aruba.it 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: smtplq03.aruba.it 1.6.2 0/1000/N Subject: [netext] Meetecho support for NETEXT WG meeting session X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:46:30 -0000 Hi all, a virtual room has been reserved on the Meetecho system for Wednesday's NETEXT WG meeting session. Access to the on-line session (including audio and video streams) will be available at: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf83/netext The Meetecho session automatically logs you into the standard IETF jabber room. So, from there, you can have an integrated experience involving all media and allowing you to interact with the room. Remote participants might also send their own voice to the room, if they want to, by either calling a landline phone number, or using our embedded VoIP applet (in this last case they are *strongly* advised to use a headset). A tutorial of interactivity features of the tool can be found at: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf83/tutorials Cheers, the Meetecho team -- Meetecho s.r.l. Web Conferencing and Collaboration Tools www.meetecho.com From cjbc@it.uc3m.es Tue Mar 27 08:35:09 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF1221E81FD; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:35:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.389, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t4+4MaL9j4dI; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE6421E81F5; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:35:00 -0700 (PDT) X-uc3m-safe: yes Received: from [130.129.83.185] (dhcp-53b9.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.83.185]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2950E75A3BC; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:34:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1332862493.5725.146.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano To: dmm@ietf.org, netext@ietf.org Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:34:53 +0200 Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-iuAzEUYlIORnzoDwq0/v" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-6.8.0.1017-18802.000 Cc: Telemaco Melia Subject: [netext] Network-based DMM demo (Thu 15:30 room 251) X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:35:09 -0000 --=-iuAzEUYlIORnzoDwq0/v Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, We'd like to announce that our network-based DMM demo will take place on Thursday at 15:30 in room 251. The demo will show a Linux-based prototype based on [1] and [2] running on a live setup. The setup is composed of three "anchor routers", a "centralized LMA" for control plane, a couple of correspondent nodes (a netbook and an IPv6 camera) and a legacy IPv6 mobile node (a netbook). Looking forward to seeing you there and getting your feedback. Thanks, Carlos, Telemaco and Juan Carlos [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bernardos-dmm-pmip-01 [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed-anchoring-00 --=20 Carlos Jes=FAs Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/ GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67 --=-iuAzEUYlIORnzoDwq0/v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk9x3h0ACgkQNdy6TdFwT2c0RwCgiROija/bDtjmdupZdbHZpO+a wTAAn1JgCe7c8OjI1iUsfOhHN5h2CoCI =O6Ui -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-iuAzEUYlIORnzoDwq0/v-- From cjbc@it.uc3m.es Wed Mar 28 02:02:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D2A21F89CD; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 02:02:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.494 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P-bmN7W+ByBg; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 02:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E626221F89C5; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 02:02:02 -0700 (PDT) X-uc3m-safe: yes Received: from [130.129.20.208] (dhcp-14d0.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.20.208]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FBCF75AD37; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:02:01 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1332925320.5725.203.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano To: Dapeng Liu Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:02:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <00a001cd0cb8$160fea70$422fbf50$@chinamobile.com> References: <1332862493.5725.146.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> <00a001cd0cb8$160fea70$422fbf50$@chinamobile.com> Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Isqnbqkt9QjTqKG99O7O" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-6.8.0.1017-18802.006 Cc: netext@ietf.org, dmm@ietf.org, 'Telemaco Melia' Subject: Re: [netext] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiBbRE1NXSBOZXR3b3JrLWJhc2VkIERNTSBk?= =?utf-8?q?emo_=28Thu_15=3A30_room_251=29?= X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:02:04 -0000 --=-Isqnbqkt9QjTqKG99O7O Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Dapeng, On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 15:54 +0800, Dapeng Liu wrote: > Hello Carlos, >=20 > Sounds interesting, may I ask how many virtual routers is running on the > anchor router? Thanks. I'm not sure I got your question right. If you are asking how many "virtual machines" we are running in our demo, then the answer is none, we are using different physical boxes for each entity. If you are asking how many distributed logical interfaces are configured on each anchor router, this depends on the mobility pattern of the MN, but since we have one MN and three anchor routers, each of them can have at most three. Thanks, Carlos >=20 > Regards, > -Dapeng Liu > -----=E9=82=AE=E4=BB=B6=E5=8E=9F=E4=BB=B6----- > =E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: dmm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dmm-bounces@iet= f.org] =E4=BB=A3=E8=A1=A8 Carlos Jes=C3=BA > s Bernardos Cano > =E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4: 2012=E5=B9=B43=E6=9C=8827=E6=97=A5 = 23:35 > =E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: dmm@ietf.org; netext@ietf.org > =E6=8A=84=E9=80=81: Telemaco Melia > =E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98: [DMM] Network-based DMM demo (Thu 15:30 room 251) >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > We'd like to announce that our network-based DMM demo will take place on > Thursday at 15:30 in room 251. >=20 > The demo will show a Linux-based prototype based on [1] and [2] running o= n a > live setup. >=20 > The setup is composed of three "anchor routers", a "centralized LMA" for > control plane, a couple of correspondent nodes (a netbook and an IPv6 > camera) and a legacy IPv6 mobile node (a netbook). >=20 > Looking forward to seeing you there and getting your feedback. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Carlos, Telemaco and Juan Carlos >=20 > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bernardos-dmm-pmip-01 > [2] > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed-anchoring-00 > -- > Carlos Jes=C3=BAs Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/ GPG FP: D= 29B > 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67 >=20 --=20 Carlos Jes=C3=BAs Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/ GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67 --=-Isqnbqkt9QjTqKG99O7O Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk9y04gACgkQNdy6TdFwT2dizACfXb38xT+Xo7HGL+w4CNH1eGGl 4VAAoNTrYMHpBVNLpphuhJbxsDwaaQWv =iFtE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Isqnbqkt9QjTqKG99O7O--