From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Wed Aug 10 13:40:32 2011 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 189AD11E80B3 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:40:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, 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 P3dl+qHHElRc for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:40:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-sa01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C951A11E807E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:40:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-sa01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7AKexhe005342 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:41:02 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:41:00 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.61) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:40:59 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:40:59 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: IETF81 WG Meeting minutes Thread-Index: AQHMV53PoGo9mLojrkCI5+P0dASVDA== Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:40:59 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <0DA3353D219EAC44B32CB028101FCD9B@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 20:41:00.0242 (UTC) FILETIME=[D042C320:01CC579D] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] IETF81 WG Meeting minutes 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, 10 Aug 2011 20:40:32 -0000 DQpIZWxsbywNCg0KUGxlYXNlIGZpbmQgYmVsb3cgdGhlIE5ldEV4dCBXRyBtZWV0aW5nQElFVEY4 MSBtaW51dGVzLiBJZiB5b3Ugbm90ZSBhbnkNCmRpc2NyZXBhbmN5IG9yIGVycm9ycywgcGxlYXNl IGRvIGxldCBtZSBrbm93IGFuZCBJIHdpbGwgY29ycmVjdCB0aGVtLg0KDQotQmFzYXZhcmFqDQoN CkFsc28gYXQ6IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MvODEvbWludXRlcy9uZXRl eHQudHh0DQoNCk5ldHdvcmstQmFzZWQgTW9iaWxpdHkgRXh0ZW5zaW9ucyBXRyBtZWV0aW5nIGF0 IElFVEY4MSAoUXVlYmVjLCBDQSkNCg0KVEhVUlNEQVksIEp1bHkgMjgsIDIwMTENCjEzMDAtMTUw MCBBZnRlcm5vb24gU2Vzc2lvbiBJDQoNCkNoYWlyczogIEJhc2F2YXJhaiBQYXRpbCAoYmFzYXZh cmFqLnBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbSkNCiAgICAgICAgIFJhamVldiBLb29kbGkgKHJrb29kbGlAY2lz Y28uY29tKQ0KDQpUaGVzZSBtZWV0aW5nIG1pbnV0ZXMgYXJlIGNvdXJ0ZXN5IG9mOg0KMS4gQ2hh cmxlcyBQZXJraW5zIChjaGFybGVzLnBlcmtpbnNAZWFydGhsaW5rLm5ldCkNCjIuIERpcmsgVm9u LUh1Z28gIChEaXJrLnZvbi1IdWdvQHRlbGVrb20uZGUpDQoNCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KDQpDaGFpcnMgYW5ub3Vu Y2Ugc2xpZ2h0IGNoYW5nZSB0byAobGF0ZXN0KSBwdWJsaXNoZWQgYWdlbmRhOiBQTUlQdjYNCmlu dGVyLXdvcmtpbmcgd2l0aCBXaUZpIGFjY2VzcyBhdXRoZW50aWNhdGlvbihJLUQ6DQpodHRwOi8v d3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2lkL2RyYWZ0LWxpZWJzY2gtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXA2LWF1dGhpd2stMDIudHh0 KQ0KaGFzIGJlZW4gZHJvcHBlZCBmcm9tIHRoZSBhZ2VuZGEgZm9yIHRvZGF5cyBtZWV0aW5nLg0K DQpMb2dpc3RpY3MgKEJsdWVzaGVldHMsIG1pbnV0ZXMgdGFrZXJzOiBDaGFybGllIGFuZCBEaXJr LCBqYWJiZXI6DQpCZWhjZXQsIGFnZW5kYSBiYXNoaW5nKQ0KDQoyLiBXRyBTdGF0dXMgdXBkYXRl ICAgQ2hhaXJzICAgNSBNaW5zDQogICA9IGlldGYtbmV0ZXh0LXJlZGlyZWN0LTA4IHNlbnQgYmFj ayBmb3IgSVBSIGlzc3Vlcw0KICAgICByZWxhdGVkIHNlY3Rpb25zICg1LjQpIHdlcmUgZGVsZXRl ZC4NCiAgID0gaWV0Zi1uZXRleHQtYnVsay1yZS1yZWdpc3RyYXRpb24tMDQNCiAgICAgICBXQyBM QyBjb21wbGV0ZWQ7IHNpZ25pZmljYW50IGNoYW5nZXMgbWFkZS4gIE5lZWQgcmV2aWV3cy4NCiAg ICAgICAgICBDYXJsb3MgQmVybmFyZG9zIHZvbHVudGVlcmluZyB0byByZXZpZXcuICBNYXJjbyBM aWVic2NoDQp2b2x1bnRlZXJpbmcuDQogICA9IGlldGYtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXAtbHItMDQNCiBXQyBM QyBjb21wbGV0ZWQ7IGEgZmV3IHJldmlld3MgcmVjZWl2ZWQuDQogQ2hhaXIgcmV2aWV3IGRvbmUu IFJldmlzZWQgSS1EIG5lZWRlZC4NCiAgID0gaWV0Zi1uZXRleHQtcmFkaXVzLXBtaXA2LTAzDQog ICAgICAgIFdDIExDIGNvbXBsZXRlZDsgcmFkaXVzIGRyYWZ0IHJldmlld2VkIGJ5IHJhZGl1cyBl eHBlcnQgUGV0ZQ0KTWNDYW5uIC0NCiBoZSBpcyBoYXBweSB3aXRoIGl0LiBPbmx5IGNvbW1lbnQg b24gY29sbGFwc2Ugb2YNCiAuLi4gKHNpZ25hbGxpbmc/KS4gQ2hhaXIgcmV2aWV3IHN1Ym1pdHRl ZC4gIE5ldyByZXZpc2lvbiBhd2FpdGVkDQogcHJpb3IgdG8gZm9yd2FyZGluZyB0aGUgSS1EIHRv IElFU0cNCiAgID0gaWV0Zi1uZXRleHQtbG9naWNhbC1pbnRlcmZhY2Utc3VwcG9ydC0wMiBMb2dp Y2FsIEludGVyZmFjZToNCiAgICAgLSBzZXQgb2YgaXNzdWVzIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBpZGVudGlmaWVk LCBkaXNjdXNzZWQgYXQgSUVURiA4MA0KICAgICAgIC0gRWRpdG9yIGhhcyBwcm9wb3NlZCB0ZXh0 Lg0KICAgICAgICAgLSBXRyBjb25zZW5zdXMgbmVlZGVkLCBmb2xsb3dlZCBieSByZXZpc2lvbg0K DQouLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLg0KDQozLiBP cGVuIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb2YgKHJlbWFpbmluZykgaXNzdWVzIHJlbGF0ZWQgdG8gbG9naWNhbCBp bnRlcmZhY2UNCiAgIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIG11bHRpLW1vZGUgSVAgaG9zdHMgICAgICAgICAgICAg IDIwIE1pbnMNCiAgIFdlIGhhdmUgaGFkIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb24gdGhlIHNldCBvZiBpc3N1ZXMg dGhhdCBoYXZlIGJlZW4NCiAgIGlkZW50aWZpZWQgYW5kIGNhcHR1cmVkIGluIHRoZSB0cmFja2Vy DQogICAoaHR0cDovL3RyYWMudG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvd2cvbmV0ZXh0L3RyYWMvcmVwb3J0LzEp IGF0DQogICBJRVRGODAuIEF1dGhvcnMgaGF2ZSBwcm9wb3NlZCB0ZXh0IHRvIHJlc29sdmUgdGhl c2UgaXNzdWVzLiBXZSBuZWVkDQogICB0byBjbG9zZSB0aGUgaXNzdWVzIGFuZCBtb3ZlIGZvcndh cmQuIFNvIHdlIHdpbGwgc2VlayBjb25zZW5zdXMgYXQNCiAgIHRoZSBtZWV0aW5nIGFuZCBvbiB0 aGUgbGlzdCBpbiBvcmRlciB0byBtYWtlIHByb2dyZXNzLg0KICAgSS1EOiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW5l dGV4dC1sb2dpY2FsLWludGVyZmFjZS1zdXBwb3J0LTAyDQoNCi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uDQoNCjQuIFBNSVA2IGV4dGVuc2lvbnMgZm9yIGZs b3cgbW9iaWxpdHkgIDIwIE1pbnMNCiAgIFRoaXMgd29yayBpdGVtIGlzIHN0dWNrIGluIGEgcXVh Z21pcmUgYW5kIGhhcyBub3QgbWFkZSBmb3J3YXJkDQogICBwcm9ncmVzcy4gVGhlcmUgaXMgbm8g dmFsdWUgaW4gcmVoYXNoaW5nIHRoZSBzYW1lIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYXMNCiAgIElFVEY4MC4NCiAg IFdlIHdpbGwgc2VlayBjb25zZW5zdXMgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgSS1EIGFzIFdHIGRv Y3VtZW50DQogICB3aGlsZSByZWNvZ25pemluZyB0aGF0IHRoZXJlIGFyZSBpc3N1ZXMgYW5kIGNv bmNlcm5zIHdoaWNoIG5lZWQgdG8NCiAgIGJlIHJlc29sdmVkLiBXZSB3aWxsIHVzZSB0aGUgaXNz dWUgdHJhY2tlciB0byBjYXB0dXJlIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMNCiAgIGFuZCByZXNvbHZlIHRoZW0gdGhy b3VnaCB0aGUgV0cgcHJvY2Vzcy4gQnV0IHdlIGNhbiBkbyB0aGlzIG9ubHkNCiAgIGFmdGVyIHdl IGhhdmUgYSBiYXNlbGluZSBkb2N1bWVudCB3aGljaCBpcyBhIFdHIGFkb3B0ZWQgSS1ELg0KICAg SS1EOiBkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAzDQogICBVUkw6DQog ICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2lkL2RyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZs b3dtb2ItMDMudHh0DQoNCiAgID0gUHJvcG9zYWwgZm9yIG1ha2luZyBwcm9ncmVzcyBvbiBmbG93 IG1vYmlsaXR5DQogICAgIC0gZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0w Mw0KICAgICAgIC0gdGhlcmUgYXJlIGNvbmNlcm5zIHdpdGggdGhhdCBwcm9wb3NhbA0KICAgICAg ICAgLSBpbiBvcmRlciB0byBtYWtlIHByb2dyZXNzLCByZWNvbW1lbmQgYWRvcHRpbmcgaXQgYW55 d2F5DQogICAgDQogICBRdWVzdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgYXR0ZW5kZWVzIGF0IHRoZSBtZWV0aW5nOiAi U2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IEktRDoNCiAgIGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZs b3dtb2ItMDMudHh0IGFzIHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludA0KICAgb2YgdGhlIFdHIGRvY3VtZW50 PyIgDQogICAtIHN0cm9uZyBjb25zZW5zdXMgaW4gcm9vbSB0byBhZG9wdCAoMTggdG8gemVybykN Cg0KLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4NCg0KNS4g UHJlZml4IERlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2ICAgIDEwIE1pbnMNCiAgIEkt RDogZHJhZnQtemhvdS1uZXRleHQtcGQtcG1pcC0wMQ0KICAgVVJMOiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL2lkL2RyYWZ0LXpob3UtbmV0ZXh0LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0DQogICBQcmVzZW50ZXI6IENh cmwgV2lsbGlhbXMNCg0KICAgUHJvYmxlbToNCiAgID0gR2FwIGJldHdlZW4gTkVNTyBhbmQgREhD UHY2LVBEIChSRkMgNjI3NikgaW4gUE1JUHY2DQogICA9IEluIFBNSVB2NiwgcHJlZml4IGZvciBN TiBpcyBob3N0ZWQgb24gdGhlIGFjY2VzcyBsaW5rIC0tDQogICAgIG5vdCBhIGRlbGVnYXRlZCBw cmVmaXgNCiAgICAgPSBGb3IgTVIsIG5lZWQgZGVsZWdhdGlvbiAobm90IHNwZWNpZmllZCkuDQog ICAgICAgPG5vdGU6IGFwcGxpY2FibGUgZm9yIGhvbWUgQ1BFIGNhc2U+DQogICAgICAgPSBQcmVm aXggbm90IHByb3Blcmx5ICJhZHZlcnRpc2VkIiAtLSBMTUEgY291bGQgZmFpbCB0bw0KICAgZm9y d2FyZC4NCiAgID0gQ2FybG9zOiBXYW50cyBhIGJpdCBtb3JlIGdlbmVyYWwgc29sdXRpb24gdG8g YWxsb3cgZm9yIE1SIDwtLT4gTUFHDQogICAgIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMgbW9iaWxlIE1BRw0KICAgICA9 IENhcmw6IGxvb2tpbmcgYXQgbW9yZSBsaW1pdGVkIHByb2JsZW0gd2l0aCBpUGhvbmUgKGUuZy4s DQogICB0ZXRoZXJpbmcpDQogICA9IEFsc28gM0dQUCBSZWwtMTAgKFRTIDI5LjA2MSkgdXNlcyBh cHByb2FjaCBpbiBSRkMgNjI3Ng0KICAgPSBLZXkgcG9pbnQ6IGRlbGVnYXRlZCBwcmVmaXgoZXMp IG5lZWQgdG8gYmUgYXNzb2NpYXRlZCB3aXRoDQogICAgIFBNSVB2NiBiaW5kaW5nIGFuZCBmb3J3 YXJkaW5nIHN0YXRlDQogICAgID0gSmFyaTogc3RydWdnbGluZyB0byB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIHRoZSBk aWZmZXJlbmNlIGZyb20gb3RoZXINCiAgIHByb2JsZW1zDQogICAgIC0gV2l0aCBleGlzdGluZyBz b2x1dGlvbnMsIHJvdXRlcnMgb24gcGF0aCBhbHJlYWR5IGhhdmUgdG8ga25vdw0KICAgICBob3cg dG8gZm9yd2FyZCBwYWNrZXRzIHRvIGRlbGVnYXRlZCBwcmVmaXgNCiAgID09IEJlaGNldDogcHJv YmxlbSBpcyB3ZSBkbyBub3QgaGF2ZSBhIFBNSVAgIk5FTU8iDQogICAgICAgID09IEphcmkgcmVw aHJhc2luZyBKb25uZTogaW4gUE1JUCBhY3R1YWxseSBoYXZlIGENCiAgICAgICAgICAgZGlzdHJp YnV0ZWQgcm91dGVyIHNvIExNQSBoYXMgdG8gYmUgZXhwbGljaXRseSB0b2xkDQogICAgID09IFJh amVldjogTUFHIGNvdWxkIGhhdmUgYSAvNDgsIGFuZCB3aGVuIG1vYmlsZSBhdHRhY2hlcw0KICAg ICAgICBpdCBnZXRzIGEgcHJlZml4IGZyb20gdGhlIC80OC4gIFdoZW4gREhDUC1QRCBpcyBjYWxs ZWQsIGhhcw0KICAgICAgdG8gYmUgYWxsb2NhdGVkIHNheSwgcGFydGljdWxhciAvNTYgZnJvbSB0 aGUgLzQ4Lg0KICAgICA9PSBKb25uZTogdGhpcyBzZWVtcyBsaWtlIGEgY2xlYXIgc29sdXRpb24u ICBOb2Rlcw0KICAgICAgICBiZWhpbmQgdGhlIE1SIGNvdWxkIHVzZSBNb2JpbGUgSVAgZm9yIHRo ZWlyIGluZGl2aWR1YWwgbW9iaWxpdHkgaWYNCiAgICAgICAgbmVlZGVkLg0KICA9PSBBbGV4OiBt b3JlIHRoYW4gdHdvIG9yIHRocmVlIHNvbHV0aW9ucyBhcm91bmQuIEFsc28gc3RhdGVkIHRoYXQN CiAgIGhlIG1heSBiZSBhd2FyZSBvZiBhIHBvdGVudGlhbCBJUFIgb24gdGhpcyB0b3BpYy4NCiAg ICAgIFNvLCB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbSBzZWVtcyByZWxldmFudC4NCiAgPT0gQ2FybDogQWRvcHQgYXMg YSBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KDQpDaGFpcnM6IGhvdyBtYW55IHBlb3BsZSB0aGlu ayB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbSBpcyByZWxldmFudD8gMTkoPykNCkhvdyBtYW55IGhhdmUgcmVhZCBpdDog Nw0KSG93IG1hbnkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb24gaW4gdGhlIGRyYWZ0 IGNhbiBiZSBzdGFydGluZw0KcG9pbnQgdG8gd29yayBvbiB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbT8gSW4gZmF2b3I6 IDcgOyAgT3Bwb3NlZDogMQ0KQWxleDogY291bGQgaGVscCBvbiBwcm9ibGVtLCBidXQgbm90IGNv bW1lbnQgb24gc29sdXRpb24uDQoNCi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uDQoNCjYuIElQIFRyYWZmaWMgT2ZmbG9hZCBTZWxlY3RvciBPcHRpb24gZm9y IFByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2ICAgMTAgTWlucw0KICAgSS1EOiANCmh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5v cmcvaWQvZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlvbi0wMS50eHQN CiAgIFByZXNlbnRlcjogU3JpIEd1bmRhdmVsbGkvSm91bmkgS29yaG9uZW4NCg0KICAgLSBJbiBQ TUlQdjY6IElQdjQgaG9tZSBhZGRyZXNzIHRvIG1vYmlsZSBub2RlIGlzIGFuY2hvcmVkIG9uIGhv bWUNCiAgICAgTE1BDQogICAgIC0gQWxsIElQIHRyYWZmaWMgZnJvbSB0aGF0IElQdjQgYWRkcmVz cyBpcyByZXZlcnNlIHR1bm5lbGVkIHRvDQogICAgIGhvbWUgbmV0Lg0KICAgICAtIE9wZXJhdG9y cyBhcmUgZXhwbG9yaW5nIG5ldyB3YXlzIHRvIG9mZmxvYWQgc29tZSBJUCB0cmFmZmljLg0KICAg ICAtIEFsc28gaW1wb3J0YW50OiB0aGUgaW52ZXJzZSBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IChET04nVCBvZmZsb2Fk DQogICAgIDxzb21ldGhpbmc+KQ0KICAgICAtIElQIFRyYWZmaWMgT2ZmbG9hZCBTZWxlY3RvciBP cHRpb24gdXNlZCB0byBtYXRjaCBwYWNrZXRzIGZvcg0KICAgICBvZmZsb2FkDQogICAgICAgPSBV c2VzIFJGQyA2MDg4DQogICAgICAgLSBGaWx0ZXJzOiBkZXN0aW5hdGlvbiBwcmVmaXgsIElQIGZs b3cgdHVwbGUsIEFwcGxpY2F0aW9uDQogICAgIGdyYW51bGFyaXR5LA0KIE5BSS84MDIuMTEgU1NJ RCwgQVBOLCBFeGNlcHQtZm9yDQogLSBOZXcgb3B0aW9uIGV4Y2hhbmdlZCBiZXR3ZWVuIE1BRyBh bmQgTE1BLCB1c2luZyBSRkMgNjA4OA0KICAgb3B0aW9uIGZvcm1hdHMgKElQdjQgYmluYXJ5IHRy YWZmaWMgc2VsZWN0b3Igb3B0aW9uKQ0KICAgLSBPZmZsb2FkIFBvbGljeSBFbmZvcmNlbWVudCBv biBNQUcNCiAgICAgIC0gQmFzYXZhcmFqOiBob3cgYWJvdXQgYXNzaWduaW5nIGEgZGlmZmVyZW50 IGFkZHJlc3MgZm9yDQogICAgICB0cmFmZmljIHRvIGJlIG9mZmxvYWRlZC4NCiAgPSBCYXNhdmFy YWo6IFdoYXQgYWJvdXQgTkFUIGJpbmRpbmdzPw0KICA9IFNyaTogYnV0IHRvZGF5IE1OIGNhbiBv bmx5IGdldCBvbmUgYWRkcmVzcw0KICA9IFJhamVldjogVGhlcmUgYXJlIHdheXMgdG8gbW92ZSB0 aGUgTkFUIGJpbmRpbmcNCiAgPSBKb25uZTogSG93IGRvZXMgTUFHIGtub3cgd2hhdCB0byBvZmZs b2FkDQogICAgPT0gU3JpOiBMTUEgdGVsbHMgTUFHLCBhY2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gZmlsdGVyDQogICAg IHRhYmxlICAgICAgICANCiAgPSBCcnVubzogV2hhdCB3b3VsZCB0cmlnZ2VyIHNlbmRpbmcgUEJV IHdpdGggdGhpcyBvcHRpb24/DQogICAgID09IFNyaTogTUFHIGNvdWxkIHByb3Bvc2Ugc29tZXRo aW5nDQogICAgID09IFJhamVldjogQ291bGQgYmUgcHJvcG9zZWQsIGFuZCByZWplY3RlZC4uLg0K ICA9IEpvbm5lOiBIYXJkIHRvIGltYWdpbmUgaG93IHRvIHBvcHVsYXRlIHRoZSB0cmFmZmljDQog ICAgZmlsdGVycyB3aXRoIGFsbCB0aGUgZGVzdGluYXRpb24gYWRkcmVzc2VzDQogID0gTGl1IERh cGVuZzogSG93IHRvIHRlbGwgYWJvdXQgcHJveGltaXR5IG9mIGRlc3RpbmF0aW9uDQogICAgPT0g U3JpOiBpdCdzIGFib3V0IG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgdGhlIFBETi1ndy4NCg0KUm91Z2ggd29ya2luZyBn cm91cCBjb25zZW5zdXMgdG8gYWRvcHQgYXMgV0cgaXRlbSBhbmQgZHJhZnQuDQoxMSBwZW9wbGUg dGhpbmsgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIHNvbHZlIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtLCA0IHRoaW5rIHdlIHNob3VsZCBub3Qu DQpNTCBoYXMgdG8gY29uZmlybSBhZG9wdGlvbiBhcyBzdGFydGluZyBXRyBkb2MNCg0KLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4NCg0KNy4gQWNjZXNzIE5l dHdvcmsgSW5mb3JtYXRpb24gT3B0aW9uIGZvciBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2NiAgIDEwIE1pbnMN CiAgIEktRDoNCiAgIA0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pZC9kcmFmdC1ndW5kYXZlbGxpLW5l dGV4dC1hY2Nlc3MtbmV0d29yay1vcHRpb24tMDEudHh0DQogICBQcmVzZW50ZXI6IEpvdW5pIEtv cmhvbmVuDQogICAtIE5lZWQgZm9yIExNQSB0byBvZmZlciBkaWZmZXJlbnRpYXRlZCBzZXJ2aWNl cywgY2hhcmdpbmcsIHBvbGljaW5nDQogICAgIGJhc2VkIG9uIGFjY2VzcyBuZXR3b3JrLg0KICAg ICAgID0gc2VydmljZSB0cmVhdG1lbnQgY291bGQgZGVwZW5kIG9uIGhvbWUvcm9hbWluZywgODAy LjExLA0KICAgb3BlcmF0b3INCiAgIC0gUHJvcG9zYWwgZm9yIG5ldyBtb2JpbGl0eSBvcHRpb24g IkFOSSIgTUFHIC0tPiBMTUENCiAgICAgPSBBTkkgPT0gIkFjY2VzcyBOZXR3b3JrIEluZm9ybWF0 aW9uIg0KICAgICAgID0gV2h5IG5vdCB2aWEgQUFBPyAgZG9hYmxlLCBidXQgcmVsaWVzIG9uIGV4 dGVybmFsDQogICBpbmZyYXN0cnVjdHVyZQ0KICAgLSBOZXcgZm9ybWF0cyBwcmVzZW50ZWQsIHNo b3dpbmcgT3BlcnRvciBJZGVudGlmaWVyIG9wdGlvbiwNCiAgICAgTmV0d29yayBpZGVudGlmaWVy LCBldGMuDQogICAgIC0gUHJvcG9zYWwgdG8gc3RhbmRhcmRpemUgdGhlIEFOSSBvcHRpb24NCg0K QmFzYXZhcmFqIDogc3RheSBhd2F5IGZyb20gY3JlYXRpbmcgZml4ZWQgb3B0aW9ucyB3ZSBkb27D osKAwpl0IGtub3cgeWV0DQpDaGFybGllOiBpcyBNQUcgcmVzcG9uc2libGUgdG8gdHJhbnNwb3J0 IGl0IHRvIExNQSwgTUFHIGlzIG9wZXJhdGVkIGJ5DQogIG9uZSBvcGVyYXRvciwgQVBzIGJ5IGRp ZmZlcmVudCDDosKAwpMgbmV0d29yayBzaGFyaW5nIChJRCkNCkFsZXg6IEdTTSwgQ0RNQSwgw6LC gMKmDQpKb3VuaTogTkFJDQpBbGV4OiBjYW4gd2UgcmV1c2U/DQoNCjUgaGF2ZSByZWFkIHRoZSBk cmFmdA0KNCB0aGluayBpdCBpcyBhIHJlbGV2YW50IHByb2JsZW0gYW5kIHdlIGhhdmUgdG8gc29s dmUgaXQNCjIgdGhpbmsgaXQgaXMgbm8gY2xlYXIgcmVhc29uIHRvIGNhcnJ5IG1vcmUgdGhhbiBB VFQNCg0KQ2hhaXJzOiBQbGVhc2UgcmVhZCBkb2N1bWVudHMgYW5kIHJldmlldyB0aGVtLg0KQ2hh aXJzIHdpbGwgcG9sbCB0aGUgV0cgd2hldGhlciB0byB3b3JrIG9uIHRoaXMgcHJvYmxlbSBhbmQg YWRvcHQgaXQNCmFzIFdHIGl0ZW0gb24gdGhlIE1MLg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0K DQo= From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Wed Aug 10 14:19:01 2011 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 CBAB021F8BA4 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:19:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 ZXjbRmpi5pg4 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:19:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AAF921F8B9E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:19:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh106.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.32]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7ALJWt6026723 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:19:32 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:19:27 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.59) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:19:26 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.59]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:19:26 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQQ== Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 21:19:25 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4C76BDCAA7A38749A97A9F345D58AA32@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 21:19:27.0298 (UTC) FILETIME=[2F5F9220:01CC57A3] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 10 Aug 2011 21:19:01 -0000 Hello, At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility As the starting point for the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG meeting with the following result: In favor: 18 Opposed: None As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Yes [ ] No [ ] -Chairs IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt=20 From carlw@mcsr-labs.org Wed Aug 10 14:26:29 2011 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 C3C7311E807E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT) 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=[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 DMVmvuzRGtaV for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail149c38.carrierzone.com (mail149c38.carrierzone.com [66.175.56.179]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D4B11E807D for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Authenticated-User: carlw.mcsr-labs.org Received: from carlwPCstudio ([69.241.25.0]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail149c38.carrierzone.com (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p7ALQvOI022250; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 21:27:00 +0000 From: "Carl Williams" To: , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:27:02 -0400 Message-ID: <006101cc57a4$411a08a0$c34e19e0$@org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUWmQXA Content-Language: en-us X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=1.1 cv=WH2pYKfo2znK57maoZEdUWS3UQCOf0ZyNO4l+KzUvKY= c=1 sm=1 a=4nT_6M92h4wA:10 a=Gzqcop6RMF0A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=8wjbuZIaoH7ngIPs8+0CXA==:17 a=WVYIyjZpfzcROmGRKIMA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=8wjbuZIaoH7ngIPs8+0CXA==:117 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 10 Aug 2011 21:26:29 -0000 Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Yes [x] No [ ] From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Wed Aug 10 14:34:50 2011 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 7DEF611E8084 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:34:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.637 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.637 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.038, 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 1U3Hv4TFUJz8 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:34:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81F011E807D for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:34:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh104.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.30]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7ALYjd4017995 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:35:21 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:34:45 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.59) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:34:30 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.59]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:34:30 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6VIS+vHAvnEiUyuG4wvA5tZBw== Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 21:34:29 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 21:34:45.0356 (UTC) FILETIME=[52941AC0:01CC57A5] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 21:34:50 -0000 At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6" General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature and observed the following: " Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 How many have read it: 7 How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting point to work on the problem? In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 " We are now following up with the questions on the ML. Question to WG:=20 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this feature? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th on the ML. -Chairs Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Wed Aug 10 14:51:42 2011 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 367DD11E80AA for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:51:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.635 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.635 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.036, 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 5TJEXTuSbpjE for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9700911E807E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7ALqBs7002613 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:52:13 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:52:06 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-005.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.60) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:52:05 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-005.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.60]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:51:52 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhg== Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 21:51:52 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1E3C5231973C57418B1FCF7C43322651@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 21:52:06.0242 (UTC) FILETIME=[BEFEB420:01CC57A7] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 10 Aug 2011 21:51:42 -0000 At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Abstract This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IP flows. Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the minutes: " 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. " As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML before making a decision. Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. -Chairs The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Wed Aug 10 15:07:33 2011 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 120FF11E80AA for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:07:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.132 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.467, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 d6q-Q4prgub5 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:07:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6807111E807E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:07:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh102.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.23]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7AM83SJ006662 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:08:03 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:08:02 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-002.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.57) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:08:01 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-002.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.57]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:08:01 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x0w== Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:08:01 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4C744363E0A6BE43A66823985EB12D22@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 22:08:02.0720 (UTC) FILETIME=[F919AA00:01CC57A9] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:07:33 -0000 The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Was discussed at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: " 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please respond to the following questions: Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [ ] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. -Chairs From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Wed Aug 10 15:09:38 2011 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 B85DA21F8B67 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:09:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.562 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.562 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 3s10Lr8ukVgF for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5E321F8B5E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bkar4 with SMTP id r4so679076bka.31 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:10:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=Cys/29ZFJ5Km3aRv3aCiOSYLChFuWl2vhVXFO00s/2E=; b=xE0fINV0VYSF+ozrC5KriOYJ9GizHtfQQ5AlA7bNyPwsTT3oed1KfCEnQG5CZ9h5nM OVfPAEkUb1k1F+wcOTm80GN4DBYm1yMDxOiWOYoB9qBUy+cP4zpHzL9rgpVTyZ1uLwjZ XNtTPvMku4+yYmW12lrYZ5oh9mQcB398VARWA= Received: by 10.204.9.136 with SMTP id l8mr1175432bkl.1.1313014206472; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a88-114-68-66.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-68-66.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.68.66]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y8sm342729bks.54.2011.08.10.15.10.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jouni In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:10:02 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:09:38 -0000 On Aug 11, 2011, at 12:34 AM, = wrote: >=20 >=20 > Question to WG:=20 >=20 > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >=20 > Yes [x] > No [ ] >=20 > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? >=20 > Yes [x] > No [ ] >=20 - Jouni= From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Wed Aug 10 15:11:21 2011 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 BCBEE21F8BBC for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:11:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.566 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, 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 ADl5CU8JokbJ for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D1221F8BBB for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by fxe6 with SMTP id 6so1449488fxe.31 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:11:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=72Lg6ooMmowBmSk4B9FuKPGiigvKUL30Wai4UT5ezG0=; b=bzcQOKpbIyVnP/t7RoCEdli7uzwD9o07jgBBPFTL5/9lx9ZUBiSypOkFKp1NqdZw4u 5g/8lUt7nt00PXFugDlj72Q//owF1viHL+/OR+4u+C0XI2fFmK3gMusbTfES84M/bxm5 4OMQM8WR6B4WeLYEoqT6/BHJvbWssUifDx+W0= Received: by 10.204.21.147 with SMTP id j19mr2635533bkb.379.1313014312978; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a88-114-68-66.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-68-66.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.68.66]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f12sm343517bkt.36.2011.08.10.15.11.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jouni In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:11:49 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4184AAD1-9BD8-4027-89F2-1A2A8CF7C406@gmail.com> References: To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:11:21 -0000 On Aug 11, 2011, at 12:51 AM, = wrote: > Questions: >=20 > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of > interest to the WG? >=20 > Yes [x] > No [ ] >=20 > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as > the starting point in specifying the solution? >=20 > Yes [x] > No [ ] >=20 > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. >=20 - JOuni From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Wed Aug 10 15:12:05 2011 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 57CBB21F8748 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:12:05 -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 pT26Jn69UfMq for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:12:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1ED921F8747 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bkar4 with SMTP id r4so680146bka.31 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:12:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=3NKRLnuvXJW2oJxzTa4Pr++n9IJIaW/i+gBQJSox7aw=; b=wGmPOIB86q+TtbCXDMXyukoPLN9tOgs4X84ieqjOv0/cgDr2WIqfWwrAjsFM863ke9 ivtiP0LgF1Iv06H7/geDBHLo4IQanIjf3YYbH5vqq+XLJ1EACQna3RWStOfFxRO4mw6n znQOX2/tas4N1m3xSYPrKpKJo+KCrm1u7elJA= Received: by 10.204.9.136 with SMTP id l8mr1176087bkl.1.1313014356655; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a88-114-68-66.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-68-66.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.68.66]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f12sm343517bkt.36.2011.08.10.15.12.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:12:35 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jouni In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:12:35 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:12:05 -0000 On Aug 11, 2011, at 1:08 AM, wrote: > Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI > option as described in I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? > > Yes [x] > No [ ] > > Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting > point for working on this feature in the WG? > > Yes [x] > No [ ] > > > Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. - Jouni From sgundave@cisco.com Wed Aug 10 15:46:36 2011 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 00B9E21F8B5C for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.018 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.419, 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 1rMqj6myPmJk for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F5A321F8B46 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=1437; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313016428; x=1314226028; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=RFEz4cR0g2BCI+W8CO3FQEM6kNLxwmd+VIdRL7sbmnc=; b=PLoMS5dEdg8ecI47YKXcNREL83FXL2C9P70CLiyJahWQzpLUK10kUbBA fwnHj2V7XfPs9UXrXyZetCtCSISYZRS6B7Um/xdCQtbOarVTLZlU9p8PZ EX9YBAAZokr7kWATtxStQ8wDh0xBNLUqQ/vgDSoPMRSg63zoXStFslmm7 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABIKQ06rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABBpzx3gUABAQEBAgEBAQEPAScCATEdAQhtMAIEARIJEgeHTASgaAGeV4ZGBIdeiyyFE4t6 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,353,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="11941910" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2011 22:46:56 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7AMktHP002022; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:55 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:55 -0700 Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:55 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427 Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:54 -0700 From: Sri Gundavelli To: , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6VIS+vHAvnEiUyuG4wvA5tZB5UWr4LV In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 22:46:55.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=[6792A9A0:01CC57AF] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:36 -0000 1. YES 2. YES On 8/10/11 2:34 PM, "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" wrote: > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > and observed the following: > > " > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > How many have read it: 7 > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > point to work on the problem? > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > " > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From sgundave@cisco.com Wed Aug 10 15:46:59 2011 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 92FAB21F84EB for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.006 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.006 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.407, 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 lqcwr6SbGyVf for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB1721F84E4 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=1953; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313016452; x=1314226052; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=0otbaI5afRYguz5MQJ7wFLop/Ryk1tW9zf0dZALbL4g=; b=Nqu8I/BWPaIe+drs5xTv7qm6tflQ4Hqo358Gd8ccKJ/BPBvUOtrhDPkh uddzwlMCpNgkTFCsArnBg2M57eJ0c4x+Jq611sudN42wTRdpp+/i0pATQ yUvqtW9nVkQ8DuDQTpTXyK253bXTWmGIIV3EGg2Tvlv7ZGNGqUEiooQ1D 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAI0JQ06rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABBpzx3gUABAQEBAgEBAQEPAScCATEdAQg7MjACBAESCRIHh0wEoGcBnluGRgSHXosshROLeg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="11946337" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2011 22:47:31 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7AMlTwp025195; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:47:31 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:12 -0700 Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:47:12 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427 Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:11 -0700 From: Sri Gundavelli To: , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUWr5LZ In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 22:47:12.0296 (UTC) FILETIME=[718E8280:01CC57AF] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:59 -0000 1. YES 2. YES On 8/10/11 2:51 PM, "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" wrote: > > > At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload > Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > > Abstract > > This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option > for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access > gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. > Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility > anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on > the selected IP flows. > > Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to > IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. > > The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that > this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the > minutes: > " > 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. > " > > As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG > ML before making a decision. > > Questions: > > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of > interest to the WG? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as > the starting point in specifying the solution? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. > > -Chairs > > The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 > proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available > at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From sgundave@cisco.com Wed Aug 10 15:47:06 2011 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 DC05921F84F7 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.994 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.994 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.395, 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 Mz5VnAAo8E2N for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:06 -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 5FC0D21F84E4 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=1265; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313016459; x=1314226059; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=2Ra454spvS9RK8KRpRt0yFLaFTNKR/ACSpy34uzlabQ=; b=XaI1y4CHDpJazQ8AB+2gThWHNtYYgJh4Cp1Mc5qNmwjTL4B7DhJcn1wo vXi10jaEZbdenjXxf3GrcUsLJ+xYk/V+OKanrg2FnFv//iKgGQSWvQMzU UHtjHl7k2os4lQwR3ITCfDTarj7xb4/AHD0d8ItQWoSi63tIII1sk+Tsw A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABIKQ06rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABBpzx3gUABAQEBAgEBAQEPAScCATEdAQhtMAIEARIbB4dMBKBoAZ5XhkYEh16LLIUTi3o X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,353,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="11946726" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2011 22:47:34 +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 p7AMlYfN025298; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:47:34 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, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:33 -0700 Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:47:33 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427 Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:47:32 -0700 From: Sri Gundavelli To: , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UWr6bv In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 22:47:33.0939 (UTC) FILETIME=[7E74F830:01CC57AF] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 22:47:07 -0000 1. YES 2. YES On 8/10/11 3:08 PM, "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" wrote: > > The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > Was discussed > at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. > > Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: > " > 5 have read the draft > 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it > 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT > " > > This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So > please respond to the following questions: > > Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI > option as described in I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting > point for working on this feature in the WG? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > > Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. > > -Chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com Wed Aug 10 16:06:43 2011 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 BD04321F8BF6 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:06:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.157 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.157 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.047, BAYES_05=-1.11] 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 ZrGJh45Icg2X for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm30.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm30.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.90.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 261B121F8BF0 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.48] by nm30.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Aug 2011 23:07:15 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.169] by tm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Aug 2011 23:07:15 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1025.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Aug 2011 23:07:15 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 640111.76405.bm@omp1025.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 29951 invoked by uid 60001); 10 Aug 2011 23:07:15 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1313017634; bh=KTFT6Y8WBvLR7X4WW27sduIrW7CY2sCqFdxywf9H/H4=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=5Kt2+nb2JmN0nMo2ChOtBJhk4O91MBYxylK5qsEHPuF1E9I23BXtjMTDLb+g7vnJR0jBYEnLMYCEaDGFg/3u9BBdODSWC2W451dN3D835h0d+0c5sqkT5YMpFMkzK3q/e7vf+cTz2f5jzW0JfbeasFxTar9T/Xd1ZUI/iUFPP08= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=SjnHuy7IzF6ZNoyfz+PU27bo2N+84+Ec8R8HM7sFEU0Ac1Uk9JKod7aX/7xUvS0vmNkB3/GMESiqqmjWlEE17CmqZVaKr8vq7kWsmlsOUmqmU0395bhgjimdEnSJ69mN9mSAt0NhbfQrbM2l27MBPRIfCDu9JqXzUiSKkLO2S0E=; X-YMail-OSG: l62WbDgVM1m7sgUzHw9maH2o90qsSLgxkaOYXgwx_XXSenI RTMYSWmEjMAb1Fq3ur.QhsJWhMY0ofz61HIRQiHSDLzgOq9w.KQUwB_XjtKt gXLE016En4m4FOnbZn3pzaEtoRE66WzQnpBbT5_JmSH4gjita0kiCvTkpvO1 55CxWnnqVG_9oDosIbEcI3ffnztA8oa6x2C2ZefRXpsXe6EBWYun.bzy4knW AX6oaT9wrSHFNObfnF3aMRUBpQ.IRMg2UpOgAm9_Do3lAqj4A2XcN_gbsp42 FnctzWGYNMoHIDgM9CnC5rk4qsy0Ha5CyDMzhYhovasDxZme1D5XqwRF401x Ao5cZhvWBysBQrJpqAnAcdUuGpubHOl_uukLAVndia4YXW3Z.RHcgN38KwMy V5bDLy6yujphBFT4QN0DXgDm3QjVebWOeVHrUCwnxGlkOtb2oxRe_3mU3HcM m_6P2aYg- Received: from [50.58.7.243] by web111403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:07:14 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.113.313619 References: Message-ID: <1313017634.29155.YahooMailNeo@web111403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:07:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Behcet Sarikaya To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya 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, 10 Aug 2011 23:06:43 -0000 Hi Raj,=0A=A0 You mean to say adopt after revision based on the comments po= sted on the list?=0A=0ARegards,=0A=0ABehcet=0A=0A=0A=0A> Hello,=0A> =0A> At= IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6=0A= > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility=0A> As the starting point for=0A> the specification defining flow mob= ility for Proxy Mobile IPv6.=0A> We gauged support for and against adopting= this I-D at the IETF81 WG=0A> meeting with the following result:=0A> =0A> = In favor: 18=0A> Opposed: None=0A> =0A> As per process we are following up = on the mailing list with the same=0A> question. Please respond by Aug 18th,= 2011 to the question below:=0A> =0A> Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D t= he document:=0A> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be use= d as the=0A> starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Pro= xy=0A> Mobile IPv6?=0A> =0A> Yes=A0 [ ]=0A> No=A0 =A0 [ ]=0A> =0A> =0A> -C= hairs=0A> =0A> IETF81 WG minutes are posted at:=0A> http://www.ietf.org/pro= ceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt =0A> =0A> __________________________________= _____________=0A> netext mailing list=0A> netext@ietf.org=0A> https://www.i= etf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext=0A> From hurryon@gmail.com Wed Aug 10 16:57:18 2011 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 E5D4F21F8B6C for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:57:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 70aB9kZbK9h8 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D990E21F8B6A for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:57:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wwf5 with SMTP id 5so1123302wwf.13 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:57:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.195.8 with SMTP id ea8mr5591535wbb.91.1313020669915; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mp-41090.local (ver78-4-82-244-181-122.fbx.proxad.net [82.244.181.122]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id eq21sm870995wbb.52.2011.08.10.16.57.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:57:43 +0200 From: Jong-Hyouk Lee To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Message-ID: <95064D8968F742FF80356661635E87CC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: sparrow 1.3.2 (build 814.61) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="4e431af7_46e87ccd_47c0" Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 10 Aug 2011 23:57:19 -0000 --4e431af7_46e87ccd_47c0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 1. Yes. 2. Yes. -- IMARA Team, INRIA, France. Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr #webpage: http://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ Sent with Sparrow (http://bit.ly/sigsprw) On Thursday, August 11, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com (mailto:Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com) wrote: > > The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > Was discussed > at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. > > Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: > " > 5 have read the draft > 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it > 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT > " > > This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So > please respond to the following questions: > > Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI > option as described in I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting > point for working on this feature in the WG? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > > Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. > > -Chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org (mailto:netext@ietf.org) > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext --4e431af7_46e87ccd_47c0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
1. Yes.
2. Yes.

-- 
IMARA Team, INRIA, =46ra= nce. 
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null a= nd /dev/random

=23email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot= ) com =7C=7C jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr
Sent with = Sparrow
=20

On Thursday, August 11= , 2011 at 12:08 AM, Ba= savaraj.Patil=40nokia.com wrote:


The proposal: =22Access Network I= nformation Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6=22
<draft-gundavelli-netext= -access-network-option-01.txt> Was discussed
at the IET=4681 Netext= WG meeting.

Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the ro= om indicated:
=22
5 have read the draft
4 think it is a relevant= problem and we have to solve it
2 think it is no clear reason to carr= y more than ATT
=22

This email is a follow up on the WG ML befo= re we make a decision. So
please respond to the following questions:
Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI<= br>option as described in I-D:
draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network= -option-01.txt=3F

Yes =5B =5D
No =5B =5D

Q2: Do you s= upport adoption of the I-D
draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-opti= on-01.txt as the starting
point for working on this feature in the WG=3F=

Yes =5B =5D
No =5B =5D


Please respond by August = 18th to the above questions on the ML.

-Chairs


=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
netext maili= ng list
netext=40ietf.org=
https://= www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
 =20 =20 =20 =20

--4e431af7_46e87ccd_47c0-- From zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Wed Aug 10 19:33:52 2011 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 6A0375E800D; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:33:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.174 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.174 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.460, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, 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 jlL+vcqeU1SW; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:33:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D835E800C; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:33:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 152363502467742; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:27:29 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.20] by [192.168.168.16] with StormMail ESMTP id 21414.5406157678; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:34:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p7B2YEJZ071472; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:34:14 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn) In-Reply-To: To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: 5FF8152F:7DE95A2C-482578E9:00081794; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007 Message-ID: From: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:33:54 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-08-11 10:34:15, Serialize complete at 2011-08-11 10:34:15 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 000DFC8C482578E9_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn p7B2YEJZ071472 Cc: netext@ietf.org, netext-bounces@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 02:33:52 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 000DFC8C482578E9_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UXVlc3Rpb24gdG8gV0c6IA0KDQoxLiBTaG91bGQgdGhlIFdHIHNwZWNpZnkgcHJlZml4LWRlbGVn YXRpb24gc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgUE1JUDY/DQoNClllcyAgIFtYIF0NCk5vICAgIFsgXQ0KDQoyLiBD YW4gd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgV0cgZG9jdW1lbnQgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9uIHByb3Bvc2VkIGluIEktRDoN CmRyYWZ0LXpob3UtbmV0ZXh0LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0IGFzIHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBv ZiB0aGlzDQpmZWF0dXJlPw0KDQpZZXMgICBbWCBdDQpObyAgICBbIF0NCg0KDQoNCjxCYXNhdmFy YWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tPiANCreivP7IyzogIG5ldGV4dC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnDQoy MDExLTA4LTExIMnPzucgMDU6MzQNCg0KytW8/sjLDQo8bmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnPg0Ks63LzQ0K DQrW98ziDQpbbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogV29yayBvbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHByZWZp eCBkZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvciBQcm94eSANCk1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Pw0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpBdCBJ RVRGODEsIENhcmwgV2lsbGlhbXMgcHJlc2VudGVkIHRoZSBJLUQ6ICJQcmVmaXggRGVsZWdhdGlv biBmb3INClByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2IiA8ZHJhZnQtemhvdS1uZXRleHQtcGQtcG1pcC0wMS50 eHQ+DQoNCkdlbmVyYWwgY29uc2Vuc3VzIGF0IHRoZSBOZXRleHQgV0cgbWVldGluZyB3YXMgdGhh dCBwcmVmaXggZGVsZWdhdGlvbg0KaXMgYSByZXF1aXJlZCBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQTUlQNi4gV2Ug Z2F1Z2VkIHRoZSBpbnRlcmVzdCBpbiB0aGUgcm9vbSB0bw0KYWRvcHQgdGhpcyBJLUQgYXMgdGhl IHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IG9mIGEgV0cgSS1EIGZvciB0aGUgUEQgZmVhdHVyZQ0KYW5kIG9ic2Vy dmVkIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmc6DQoNCiINCkNoYWlyczogaG93IG1hbnkgcGVvcGxlIHRoaW5rIHRo ZSBwcm9ibGVtIGlzIHJlbGV2YW50OiAxOQ0KSG93IG1hbnkgaGF2ZSByZWFkIGl0OiA3DQpIb3cg bWFueSB0aGluayB0aGF0IHRoZSBwcm9wb3NlZCBzb2x1dGlvbiBpbiB0aGUgZHJhZnQgY2FuIGJl IHN0YXJ0aW5nDQpwb2ludCB0byB3b3JrIG9uIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtPw0KSW4gZmF2b3I6IDcgOyAg T3Bwb3NlZDogMQ0KIg0KDQpXZSBhcmUgbm93IGZvbGxvd2luZyB1cCB3aXRoIHRoZSBxdWVzdGlv bnMgb24gdGhlIE1MLg0KDQpRdWVzdGlvbiB0byBXRzogDQoNCjEuIFNob3VsZCB0aGUgV0cgc3Bl Y2lmeSBwcmVmaXgtZGVsZWdhdGlvbiBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBQTUlQNj8NCg0KWWVzICAgWyBdDQpO byAgICBbIF0NCg0KMi4gQ2FuIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIGRvY3VtZW50IHRoZSBzb2x1dGlvbiBw cm9wb3NlZCBpbiBJLUQ6DQpkcmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1wZC1wbWlwLTAxLnR4dCBhcyB0aGUg c3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgb2YgdGhpcw0KZmVhdHVyZT8NCg0KWWVzICAgWyBdDQpObyAgICBbIF0N Cg0KUGxlYXNlIHJlc3BvbmQgYnkgQXVndXN0IDE4dGggb24gdGhlIE1MLg0KDQotQ2hhaXJzDQoN ClBsZWFzZSBzZWUgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYXQgdGhlIElFVEY4MSBXRyBtZWV0aW5nIG9uIHRo aXMgdG9waWMgYXQ6DQpodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0ZXMv bmV0ZXh0LnR4dA0KDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fDQpuZXRleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQoNCg0KDQo= --=_alternative 000DFC8C482578E9_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PHR0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9Mj5RdWVzdGlvbiB0byBXRzogPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KMS4gU2hv dWxkIHRoZSBXRyBzcGVjaWZ5IHByZWZpeC1kZWxlZ2F0aW9uIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIFBNSVA2Pzxi cj4NCjxicj4NClllcyAmbmJzcDsgW1ggXTxicj4NCk5vICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtbIF08YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQoyLiBDYW4gd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgV0cgZG9jdW1lbnQgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9uIHByb3Bvc2Vk IGluIEktRDo8YnI+DQpkcmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1wZC1wbWlwLTAxLnR4dCBhcyB0aGUgc3Rh cnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgb2YgdGhpczxicj4NCmZlYXR1cmU/PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KWWVzICZuYnNwOyBb WCBdPGJyPg0KTm8gJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO1sgXTwvZm9udD48L3R0Pg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJy Pg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD0zNSU+PGZv bnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxiPiZsdDtCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEu Y29tJmd0OzwvYj4NCjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+ t6K8/sjLOiAmbmJzcDtuZXRleHQtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvZm9udD4NCjxwPjxmb250IHNp emU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj4yMDExLTA4LTExIMnPzucgMDU6MzQ8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8dGQg d2lkdGg9NjQlPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxk aXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPsrVvP7IyzwvZm9u dD48L2Rpdj4NCjx0ZD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+Jmx0O25ldGV4dEBp ZXRmLm9yZyZndDs8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmln aHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPrOty808L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+ DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZh Y2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPtb3zOI8L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9 InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPltuZXRleHRdIENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBXb3JrIG9uIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcN CnByZWZpeCBkZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvciBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj88L2ZvbnQ+PC90YWJsZT4N Cjxicj4NCjx0YWJsZT4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPHRkPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YnI+ PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj48dHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yPjxicj4NCkF0IElFVEY4 MSwgQ2FybCBXaWxsaWFtcyBwcmVzZW50ZWQgdGhlIEktRDogJnF1b3Q7UHJlZml4IERlbGVnYXRp b24gZm9yPGJyPg0KUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYmcXVvdDsgJmx0O2RyYWZ0LXpob3UtbmV0ZXh0 LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxicj4NCkdlbmVyYWwgY29uc2Vuc3VzIGF0IHRoZSBO ZXRleHQgV0cgbWVldGluZyB3YXMgdGhhdCBwcmVmaXggZGVsZWdhdGlvbjxicj4NCmlzIGEgcmVx dWlyZWQgZmVhdHVyZSBmb3IgUE1JUDYuIFdlIGdhdWdlZCB0aGUgaW50ZXJlc3QgaW4gdGhlIHJv b20gdG88YnI+DQphZG9wdCB0aGlzIEktRCBhcyB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgb2YgYSBXRyBJ LUQgZm9yIHRoZSBQRCBmZWF0dXJlPGJyPg0KYW5kIG9ic2VydmVkIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmc6PGJy Pg0KPGJyPg0KJnF1b3Q7PGJyPg0KQ2hhaXJzOiBob3cgbWFueSBwZW9wbGUgdGhpbmsgdGhlIHBy b2JsZW0gaXMgcmVsZXZhbnQ6IDE5PGJyPg0KSG93IG1hbnkgaGF2ZSByZWFkIGl0OiA3PGJyPg0K SG93IG1hbnkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb24gaW4gdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGNh biBiZSBzdGFydGluZzxicj4NCnBvaW50IHRvIHdvcmsgb24gdGhlIHByb2JsZW0/PGJyPg0KSW4g ZmF2b3I6IDcgOyAmbmJzcDtPcHBvc2VkOiAxPGJyPg0KJnF1b3Q7PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KV2UgYXJl IG5vdyBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXAgd2l0aCB0aGUgcXVlc3Rpb25zIG9uIHRoZSBNTC48YnI+DQo8YnI+ DQpRdWVzdGlvbiB0byBXRzogPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KMS4gU2hvdWxkIHRoZSBXRyBzcGVjaWZ5IHBy ZWZpeC1kZWxlZ2F0aW9uIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIFBNSVA2Pzxicj4NCjxicj4NClllcyAmbmJzcDsg WyBdPGJyPg0KTm8gJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO1sgXTxicj4NCjxicj4NCjIuIENhbiB3ZSBhZG9wdCBh cyBXRyBkb2N1bWVudCB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24gcHJvcG9zZWQgaW4gSS1EOjxicj4NCmRyYWZ0LXpo b3UtbmV0ZXh0LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0IGFzIHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBvZiB0aGlzPGJy Pg0KZmVhdHVyZT88YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpZZXMgJm5ic3A7IFsgXTxicj4NCk5vICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDtbIF08YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCBieSBBdWd1c3QgMTh0aCBvbiB0aGUgTUwu PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KLUNoYWlyczxicj4NCjxicj4NClBsZWFzZSBzZWUgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24g YXQgdGhlIElFVEY4MSBXRyBtZWV0aW5nIG9uIHRoaXMgdG9waWMgYXQ6PGJyPg0KaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQ8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzxicj4N Cm5ldGV4dCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Q8YnI+DQpuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmc8YnI+DQpodHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dDxicj4NCjxicj4NCjwvZm9udD48L3R0 Pg0KPGJyPg0K --=_alternative 000DFC8C482578E9_=-- From zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Wed Aug 10 19:35:55 2011 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 59B365E800F; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:35:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.635 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.635 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, 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 pBMDH3a8uHMp; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:35:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E64635E800D; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:35:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 131323502467742; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:25:31 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.21] by [192.168.168.16] with StormMail ESMTP id 21414.5406157678; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:36:10 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse02.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p7B2aFBs055628; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:36:15 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn) In-Reply-To: To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: 57B37902:41592996-482578E9:000E327B; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007 Message-ID: From: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:36:10 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-08-11 10:36:16, Serialize complete at 2011-08-11 10:36:16 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 000E317B482578E9_=" X-MAIL: mse02.zte.com.cn p7B2aFBs055628 Cc: netext@ietf.org, netext-bounces@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 02:35:55 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 000E317B482578E9_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UXVlc3Rpb25zOg0KDQoxLiBJcyB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24gdG8gb2ZmbG9hZGluZyBzcGVjaWZpYyBJ UHY0IGZsb3dzIGZyb20gYSBNQUcgb2YNCmludGVyZXN0IHRvIHRoZSBXRz8NCg0KWWVzICAgW1hd DQpObyAgICBbIF0NCg0KMi4gU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIEktRDoNCmRyYWZ0LWd1bmRh dmVsbGktbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1zaXB0by1vcHRpb24tMDEudHh0IHdoaWNoIHdpbGwgc2VydmUg YXMNCnRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBzb2x1dGlvbj8NCg0KWWVz ICBbWF0NCk5vICAgWyBdDQoNCg0KDQo8QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbT4gDQq3orz+ yMs6ICBuZXRleHQtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KMjAxMS0wOC0xMSDJz87nIDA1OjUxDQoNCsrV vP7Iyw0KPG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCrOty80NCg0K1vfM4g0KW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3Vz IGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IHNlbGVjdGl2ZSBJUHY0IG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgZmVhdHVyZSBhcyANCnNwZWNp ZmllZCBpbiBJLUQgZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlvbg0K DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCkF0IElFVEY4MSwgdGhlIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBkaXNjdXNzZWQgdGhlIHBy b3Bvc2FsOiAiSVAgVHJhZmZpYyBPZmZsb2FkDQpTZWxlY3RvciBPcHRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5IE1v YmlsZSBJUHY2Ig0KPGRyYWZ0LWd1bmRhdmVsbGktbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1zaXB0by1vcHRpb24t MDEudHh0Pg0KDQpBYnN0cmFjdA0KDQogICBUaGlzIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5lcyBhIG1l Y2hhbmlzbSBhbmQgYSByZWxhdGVkIG1vYmlsaXR5IG9wdGlvbg0KICAgZm9yIGNhcnJ5aW5nIElQ IE9mZmxvYWQgdHJhZmZpYyBzZWxlY3RvcnMgYmV0d2VlbiBhIG1vYmlsZSBhY2Nlc3MNCiAgIGdh dGV3YXkgYW5kIGEgbG9jYWwgbW9iaWxpdHkgYW5jaG9yIGluIGEgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYg ZG9tYWluLg0KICAgQmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVkIG9mZmxvYWQgZmxvdyBzZWxlY3RvcnMg ZnJvbSB0aGUgbG9jYWwgbW9iaWxpdHkNCiAgIGFuY2hvciwgYSBtb2JpbGUgYWNjZXNzIGdhdGV3 YXkgY2FuIGVuYWJsZSBvZmZsb2FkIHRyYWZmaWMgcnVsZSBvbg0KICAgdGhlIHNlbGVjdGVkIElQ IGZsb3dzLg0KDQpQbGVhc2Ugbm90ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBvZmZsb2FkaW5nIG9mIHRyYWZmaWMgZnJv bSB0aGUgTUFHIGlzIGxpbWl0ZWQgdG8NCklQdjQgZmxvdyBvbmx5IHVzaW5nIE5BVDQ0IGZ1bmN0 aW9uYWxpdHkuDQoNClRoZSBnZW5lcmFsIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBvZiB0aGUgcm9vbSBhdCB0aGUgSUVU RjgxIFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2FzIHRoYXQNCnRoaXMgaXMgYSByZWxldmFudCBwcm9ibGVtIGFuZCBz aG91bGQgYmUgc29sdmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBXRy4gQXMgcGVyIHRoZQ0KbWludXRlczoNCiINCjExIHBl b3BsZSB0aGluayB3ZSBzaG91bGQgc29sdmUgdGhlIHByb2JsZW0sIDQgdGhpbmsgd2Ugc2hvdWxk IG5vdC4NCiINCg0KQXMgcGVyIHByb2Nlc3MsIHRoZSBzYW1lIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGlzIG5vdyBiZWlu ZyBhc2tlZCBvbiB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0IFdHDQpNTCBiZWZvcmUgbWFraW5nIGEgZGVjaXNpb24uDQoN ClF1ZXN0aW9uczoNCg0KMS4gSXMgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9uIHRvIG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgc3BlY2lmaWMg SVB2NCBmbG93cyBmcm9tIGEgTUFHIG9mDQppbnRlcmVzdCB0byB0aGUgV0c/DQoNClllcyAgIFsg XQ0KTm8gICAgWyBdDQoNCjIuIFNob3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBXRyBJLUQ6DQpkcmFmdC1ndW5k YXZlbGxpLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtc2lwdG8tb3B0aW9uLTAxLnR4dCB3aGljaCB3aWxsIHNlcnZl IGFzDQp0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24/DQoNClll cyAgWyBdDQpObyAgIFsgXQ0KDQpQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGUgYWJvdmUgcXVlc3Rpb25z IGJ5IEF1Z3VzdCAxOCwgMjAxMSBvbiB0aGUgTUwuDQoNCi1DaGFpcnMNCg0KVGhlIHNsaWRlcyBw cmVzZW50ZWQgYXQgdGhlIG1lZXRpbmcgYXJlIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgSUVURjgxDQpwcm9j ZWVkaW5ncy4gTWludXRlcyBoYXZlIGJlZW4gcG9zdGVkIHRvIHRoZSBNTCBhbmQgYXJlIGFsc28g YXZhaWxhYmxlDQphdDogaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVz L25ldGV4dC50eHQNCg0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fXw0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dA0KDQoNCg0K --=_alternative 000E317B482578E9_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PHR0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9Mj5RdWVzdGlvbnM6PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KMS4gSXMgdGhlIHNv bHV0aW9uIHRvIG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgc3BlY2lmaWMgSVB2NCBmbG93cyBmcm9tIGEgTUFHIG9mPGJy Pg0KaW50ZXJlc3QgdG8gdGhlIFdHPzxicj4NCjxicj4NClllcyAmbmJzcDsgW1hdPGJyPg0KTm8g Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO1sgXTxicj4NCjxicj4NCjIuIFNob3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBXRyBJLUQ6 PGJyPg0KZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlvbi0wMS50eHQg d2hpY2ggd2lsbCBzZXJ2ZSBhczxicj4NCnRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5n IHRoZSBzb2x1dGlvbj88YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpZZXMgJm5ic3A7W1hdPGJyPg0KTm8gJm5ic3A7IFsg XTwvZm9udD48L3R0Pg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIg dmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD0zNSU+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYi PjxiPiZsdDtCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tJmd0OzwvYj4NCjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48 Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+t6K8/sjLOiAmbmJzcDtuZXRleHQtYm91bmNl c0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvZm9udD4NCjxwPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj4yMDEx LTA4LTExIMnPzucgMDU6NTE8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8dGQgd2lkdGg9NjQlPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEw MCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0x IGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPsrVvP7IyzwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjx0ZD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEg ZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+Jmx0O25ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZyZndDs8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8dHIgdmFs aWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMt c2VyaWYiPrOty808L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxk aXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPtb3zOI8L2ZvbnQ+ PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPltuZXRleHRdIENvbnNl bnN1cyBjYWxsOiBBZG9wdCBzZWxlY3RpdmUNCklQdjQgb2ZmbG9hZGluZyBmZWF0dXJlIGFzIHNw ZWNpZmllZCBpbiBJLUQgZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlv bjwvZm9udD48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlPg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8 dGQ+PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPjx0dD48Zm9udCBzaXpl PTI+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KQXQgSUVURjgxLCB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRpc2N1c3NlZCB0aGUgcHJv cG9zYWw6ICZxdW90O0lQIFRyYWZmaWMgT2ZmbG9hZDxicj4NClNlbGVjdG9yIE9wdGlvbiBmb3Ig UHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYmcXVvdDs8YnI+DQombHQ7ZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRleHQt cG1pcHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlvbi0wMS50eHQmZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KQWJzdHJhY3Q8YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7IFRoaXMgc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbiBkZWZpbmVzIGEgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGFuZCBh IHJlbGF0ZWQgbW9iaWxpdHkgb3B0aW9uPGJyPg0KICZuYnNwOyBmb3IgY2FycnlpbmcgSVAgT2Zm bG9hZCB0cmFmZmljIHNlbGVjdG9ycyBiZXR3ZWVuIGEgbW9iaWxlIGFjY2Vzczxicj4NCiAmbmJz cDsgZ2F0ZXdheSBhbmQgYSBsb2NhbCBtb2JpbGl0eSBhbmNob3IgaW4gYSBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUg SVB2NiBkb21haW4uPGJyPg0KICZuYnNwOyBCYXNlZCBvbiB0aGUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgb2ZmbG9hZCBm bG93IHNlbGVjdG9ycyBmcm9tIHRoZSBsb2NhbCBtb2JpbGl0eTxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgYW5jaG9y LCBhIG1vYmlsZSBhY2Nlc3MgZ2F0ZXdheSBjYW4gZW5hYmxlIG9mZmxvYWQgdHJhZmZpYyBydWxl DQpvbjxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgdGhlIHNlbGVjdGVkIElQIGZsb3dzLjxicj4NCjxicj4NClBsZWFz ZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgdGhlIG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgb2YgdHJhZmZpYyBmcm9tIHRoZSBNQUcgaXMgbGlt aXRlZCB0bzxicj4NCklQdjQgZmxvdyBvbmx5IHVzaW5nIE5BVDQ0IGZ1bmN0aW9uYWxpdHkuPGJy Pg0KPGJyPg0KVGhlIGdlbmVyYWwgY29uc2Vuc3VzIG9mIHRoZSByb29tIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEg V0cgbWVldGluZyB3YXMgdGhhdDxicj4NCnRoaXMgaXMgYSByZWxldmFudCBwcm9ibGVtIGFuZCBz aG91bGQgYmUgc29sdmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBXRy4gQXMgcGVyIHRoZTxicj4NCm1pbnV0ZXM6PGJyPg0K JnF1b3Q7PGJyPg0KMTEgcGVvcGxlIHRoaW5rIHdlIHNob3VsZCBzb2x2ZSB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbSwg NCB0aGluayB3ZSBzaG91bGQgbm90Ljxicj4NCiZxdW90Ozxicj4NCjxicj4NCkFzIHBlciBwcm9j ZXNzLCB0aGUgc2FtZSBxdWVzdGlvbiBpcyBub3cgYmVpbmcgYXNrZWQgb24gdGhlIE5ldGV4dCBX Rzxicj4NCk1MIGJlZm9yZSBtYWtpbmcgYSBkZWNpc2lvbi48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpRdWVzdGlvbnM6 PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KMS4gSXMgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9uIHRvIG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgc3BlY2lmaWMgSVB2 NCBmbG93cyBmcm9tIGEgTUFHIG9mPGJyPg0KaW50ZXJlc3QgdG8gdGhlIFdHPzxicj4NCjxicj4N ClllcyAmbmJzcDsgWyBdPGJyPg0KTm8gJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO1sgXTxicj4NCjxicj4NCjIuIFNo b3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBXRyBJLUQ6PGJyPg0KZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRleHQtcG1p cHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlvbi0wMS50eHQgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBzZXJ2ZSBhczxicj4NCnRoZSBzdGFy dGluZyBwb2ludCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBzb2x1dGlvbj88YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpZZXMgJm5i c3A7WyBdPGJyPg0KTm8gJm5ic3A7IFsgXTxicj4NCjxicj4NClBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIHRvIHRo ZSBhYm92ZSBxdWVzdGlvbnMgYnkgQXVndXN0IDE4LCAyMDExIG9uIHRoZSBNTC48YnI+DQo8YnI+ DQotQ2hhaXJzPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KVGhlIHNsaWRlcyBwcmVzZW50ZWQgYXQgdGhlIG1lZXRpbmcg YXJlIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgSUVURjgxPGJyPg0KcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MuIE1pbnV0ZXMgaGF2 ZSBiZWVuIHBvc3RlZCB0byB0aGUgTUwgYW5kIGFyZSBhbHNvIGF2YWlsYWJsZTxicj4NCmF0OiBo dHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0ZXMvbmV0ZXh0LnR4dDxicj4N Cjxicj4NCjxicj4NCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fPGJyPg0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxicj4NCm5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZzxicj4NCmh0 dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPC9m b250PjwvdHQ+DQo8YnI+DQo= --=_alternative 000E317B482578E9_=-- From ahmad.muhanna@ericsson.com Wed Aug 10 23:17:18 2011 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 0C14921F84F2 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:17:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 41je4it04XL2 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:17:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51FFF21F84E7 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:17:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7B6HlNL013125 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:17:48 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.2.36]) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) with mapi; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:17:47 -0400 From: Ahmad Muhanna To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:17:45 -0400 Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUXLQfw Message-ID: <1FCAE7B6027FE3489B8497A060C704C4394B1323B2@EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 06:17:18 -0000 Hello Raj, Here is my support for this draft. 1. YES 2. YES Regards, Ahmad -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:52 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature a= s specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Select= or Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Abstract This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IP flows. Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this is= a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the minutes: " 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. " As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML be= fore making a decision. Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest= to the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the = starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. -Chairs The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedings= . Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From ahmad.muhanna@ericsson.com Wed Aug 10 23:18:27 2011 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 2DC9421F8588 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 kq-CIT6GCitj for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBEF21F8564 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p7B6Iw5J014241; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:18:59 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.2.36]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:18:52 -0400 From: Ahmad Muhanna To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:18:51 -0400 Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UXLYFw Message-ID: <1FCAE7B6027FE3489B8497A060C704C4394B1323B3@EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 06:18:27 -0000 Hello Raj, Here is my support for this draft. 1. YES 2. YES=20 Regards, Ahmad -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:08 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option= for Proxy Mobile IPv6? The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Was discussed at the= IETF81 Netext WG meeting. Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: " 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please= respond to the following questions: Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option a= s described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [ ] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point = for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. -Chairs _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com Thu Aug 11 00:15:11 2011 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 5BDFA11E8077 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:15:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] 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 Bl2VBKV0Xdv9 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:15:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [217.108.152.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5765011E8070 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id B74DB738007; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:16:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.47]) by r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD2D9738006; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:16:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:15:39 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:15:34 +0200 Message-ID: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F20E@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUXPWdA References: From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2011 07:15:39.0869 (UTC) FILETIME=[797CB8D0:01CC57F6] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 07:15:11 -0000 1: yes 2: yes > -----Message d'origine----- > De=A0: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] De la = part > de Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > Envoy=E9=A0: mercredi 10 ao=FBt 2011 23:52 > =C0=A0: netext@ietf.org > Objet=A0: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading = feature > as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option >=20 >=20 >=20 > At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload > Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > >=20 > Abstract >=20 > This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility = option > for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access > gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. > Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local = mobility > anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on > the selected IP flows. >=20 > Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to > IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. >=20 > The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that > this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the > minutes: > " > 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. > " >=20 > As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG > ML before making a decision. >=20 > Questions: >=20 > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of > interest to the WG? >=20 > Yes [x] > No [ ] >=20 > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as > the starting point in specifying the solution? >=20 > Yes [x] > No [ ] >=20 > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. >=20 > -Chairs >=20 > The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 > proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available > at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From mgrayson@cisco.com Thu Aug 11 00:57:05 2011 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 C485521F84CB for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:57:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 Gz8bCcZMKSIt for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:57:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32B721F84ED for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:57:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=mgrayson@cisco.com; l=1384; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313049459; x=1314259059; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to; bh=bb8bfP3UNX+ZgBxY63biYkd1kPXmUNhUSV+B6BSxJtg=; b=TVxFINxbM4InymiZV5ylTAO56u666vMWe1n5qJITF7/K6zR/MEXKTSsK MYy3UvA4f38ltiRzP+Xs+13e9I60WnpgEjeXfsF9Xh6jAcm26NqJvDClG h/D/nyMKNeD0IDBpv5qicpPFdkv83EzxwQqmV7ALQIoPKB+XQj2hnIxzq E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAPWKQ06Q/khN/2dsb2JhbABBp0d3gUABAQEBAwEBAQ8BHQo0FwQCAQgRBAEBCwYXAQYBJh8JCAIEARIIEweHUJ4KAZ5phWdfBJgii10 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,355,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="109928594" Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2011 07:57:37 +0000 Received: from xbh-ams-101.cisco.com (xbh-ams-101.cisco.com [144.254.74.71]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7B7vbXE008014; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 07:57:37 GMT Received: from xmb-ams-110.cisco.com ([144.254.74.85]) by xbh-ams-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:57:37 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:57:24 +0200 Message-ID: <511106E94A591D468E6EF41F5F1DCA430522A0C8@XMB-AMS-110.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UXSNMA References: From: "Mark Grayson (mgrayson)" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2011 07:57:37.0494 (UTC) FILETIME=[561BCF60:01CC57FC] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 07:57:05 -0000 Q1. Yes Q2. Yes -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: 10 August 2011 23:08 To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Was discussed at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: " 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please respond to the following questions: Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [X] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [X] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. -Chairs _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Thu Aug 11 01:02:15 2011 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 8A87521F858D for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:02:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.149 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, 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 mWIvIWozoFRx for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail53.telekom.de (tcmail53.telekom.de [217.5.214.110]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBB0A21F8586 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he111629.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.21]) by tcmail51.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 11 Aug 2011 10:02:08 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([169.254.4.241]) by HE111629.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:02:08 +0200 From: To: , Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:02:06 +0200 Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUXSlLQ Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F118328@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 11 Aug 2011 08:02:15 -0000 Yes Regards Dirk Betreff: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-f= lowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Hello, At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility As the starting point for the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG meeting with the following result: In favor: 18 Opposed: None As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Yes [ ] No [ ] -Chairs IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From zhu.chunhui@zte.com.cn Thu Aug 11 01:39:56 2011 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 C8DE221F8AFE; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:39:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.635 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.635 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, 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 H1ovqFg7K59V; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:39:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F3A21F8B08; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.99] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 152363502467742; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:37:32 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.20] by [192.168.168.15] with StormMail ESMTP id 22013.5406157678; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:33:10 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p7B8X4Ub059300; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:33:04 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhu.chunhui@zte.com.cn) In-Reply-To: To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: F6A0B3F5:F3CC322B-482578E9:002ED083; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007 Message-ID: From: zhu.chunhui@zte.com.cn Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:32:52 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-08-11 16:33:06, Serialize complete at 2011-08-11 16:33:06 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 002EFE85482578E9_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn p7B8X4Ub059300 Cc: netext@ietf.org, netext-bounces@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 08:39:56 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 002EFE85482578E9_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UTEuIFllcw0KUTIuIFllcw0KDQpCZXN0IFJlZ2FyZHMsDQpDaHVuaHVpDQoNCg0KDQoNCjxCYXNh dmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tPiANCreivP7IyzogIG5ldGV4dC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3Jn DQoyMDExLTA4LTExIDA1OjM0DQoNCsrVvP7Iyw0KPG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCrOty80NCg0K 1vfM4g0KW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IFdvcmsgb24gc3BlY2lmeWluZyBwcmVmaXgg ZGVsZWdhdGlvbiBmb3IgUHJveHkgDQpNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KQXQgSUVU RjgxLCBDYXJsIFdpbGxpYW1zIHByZXNlbnRlZCB0aGUgSS1EOiAiUHJlZml4IERlbGVnYXRpb24g Zm9yDQpQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2NiIgPGRyYWZ0LXpob3UtbmV0ZXh0LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0 Pg0KDQpHZW5lcmFsIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBhdCB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2FzIHRoYXQg cHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24NCmlzIGEgcmVxdWlyZWQgZmVhdHVyZSBmb3IgUE1JUDYuIFdlIGdh dWdlZCB0aGUgaW50ZXJlc3QgaW4gdGhlIHJvb20gdG8NCmFkb3B0IHRoaXMgSS1EIGFzIHRoZSBz dGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBvZiBhIFdHIEktRCBmb3IgdGhlIFBEIGZlYXR1cmUNCmFuZCBvYnNlcnZl ZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nOg0KDQoiDQpDaGFpcnM6IGhvdyBtYW55IHBlb3BsZSB0aGluayB0aGUg cHJvYmxlbSBpcyByZWxldmFudDogMTkNCkhvdyBtYW55IGhhdmUgcmVhZCBpdDogNw0KSG93IG1h bnkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb24gaW4gdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGNhbiBiZSBz dGFydGluZw0KcG9pbnQgdG8gd29yayBvbiB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbT8NCkluIGZhdm9yOiA3IDsgIE9w cG9zZWQ6IDENCiINCg0KV2UgYXJlIG5vdyBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXAgd2l0aCB0aGUgcXVlc3Rpb25z IG9uIHRoZSBNTC4NCg0KUXVlc3Rpb24gdG8gV0c6IA0KDQoxLiBTaG91bGQgdGhlIFdHIHNwZWNp ZnkgcHJlZml4LWRlbGVnYXRpb24gc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgUE1JUDY/DQoNClllcyAgIFsgXQ0KTm8g ICAgWyBdDQoNCjIuIENhbiB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBXRyBkb2N1bWVudCB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24gcHJv cG9zZWQgaW4gSS1EOg0KZHJhZnQtemhvdS1uZXRleHQtcGQtcG1pcC0wMS50eHQgYXMgdGhlIHN0 YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IG9mIHRoaXMNCmZlYXR1cmU/DQoNClllcyAgIFsgXQ0KTm8gICAgWyBdDQoN ClBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIGJ5IEF1Z3VzdCAxOHRoIG9uIHRoZSBNTC4NCg0KLUNoYWlycw0KDQpQ bGVhc2Ugc2VlIHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEgV0cgbWVldGluZyBvbiB0aGlz IHRvcGljIGF0Og0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25l dGV4dC50eHQNCg0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fXw0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5p ZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dA0KDQoNCg0K --=_alternative 002EFE85482578E9_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PHR0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9Mj5RMS4gWWVzPGJyPg0KUTIuIFllczwvZm9udD48L3R0Pg0K PGJyPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5CZXN0IFJlZ2FyZHMsPC9m b250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5DaHVuaHVpPC9mb250Pg0K PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRv cD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD0zNSU+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxiPiZsdDtC YXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tJmd0OzwvYj4NCjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXpl PTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+t6K8/sjLOiAmbmJzcDtuZXRleHQtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9y ZzwvZm9udD4NCjxwPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj4yMDExLTA4LTExIDA1 OjM0PC9mb250Pg0KPHRkIHdpZHRoPTY0JT4NCjx0YWJsZSB3aWR0aD0xMDAlPg0KPHRyIHZhbGln bj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNl cmlmIj7K1bz+yMs8L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2Vy aWYiPiZsdDtuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcmZ3Q7PC9mb250Pg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+ DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj6zrcvNPC9m b250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRkPg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0 Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj7W98ziPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRkPjxm b250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5bbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogV29y ayBvbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nDQpwcmVmaXggZGVsZWdhdGlvbiBmb3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjY/ PC9mb250PjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YnI+DQo8dGFibGU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjx0 ZD48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGJyPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+PHR0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9 Mj48YnI+DQpBdCBJRVRGODEsIENhcmwgV2lsbGlhbXMgcHJlc2VudGVkIHRoZSBJLUQ6ICZxdW90 O1ByZWZpeCBEZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvcjxicj4NClByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2JnF1b3Q7ICZsdDtk cmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1wZC1wbWlwLTAxLnR4dCZndDs8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpHZW5lcmFsIGNv bnNlbnN1cyBhdCB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2FzIHRoYXQgcHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRp b248YnI+DQppcyBhIHJlcXVpcmVkIGZlYXR1cmUgZm9yIFBNSVA2LiBXZSBnYXVnZWQgdGhlIGlu dGVyZXN0IGluIHRoZSByb29tIHRvPGJyPg0KYWRvcHQgdGhpcyBJLUQgYXMgdGhlIHN0YXJ0aW5n IHBvaW50IG9mIGEgV0cgSS1EIGZvciB0aGUgUEQgZmVhdHVyZTxicj4NCmFuZCBvYnNlcnZlZCB0 aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nOjxicj4NCjxicj4NCiZxdW90Ozxicj4NCkNoYWlyczogaG93IG1hbnkgcGVv cGxlIHRoaW5rIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtIGlzIHJlbGV2YW50OiAxOTxicj4NCkhvdyBtYW55IGhhdmUg cmVhZCBpdDogNzxicj4NCkhvdyBtYW55IHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgdGhlIHByb3Bvc2VkIHNvbHV0aW9u IGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdCBjYW4gYmUgc3RhcnRpbmc8YnI+DQpwb2ludCB0byB3b3JrIG9uIHRoZSBw cm9ibGVtPzxicj4NCkluIGZhdm9yOiA3IDsgJm5ic3A7T3Bwb3NlZDogMTxicj4NCiZxdW90Ozxi cj4NCjxicj4NCldlIGFyZSBub3cgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIHdpdGggdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9ucyBvbiB0 aGUgTUwuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KUXVlc3Rpb24gdG8gV0c6IDxicj4NCjxicj4NCjEuIFNob3VsZCB0 aGUgV0cgc3BlY2lmeSBwcmVmaXgtZGVsZWdhdGlvbiBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBQTUlQNj88YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQpZZXMgJm5ic3A7IFsgXTxicj4NCk5vICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtbIF08YnI+DQo8YnI+DQoy LiBDYW4gd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgV0cgZG9jdW1lbnQgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9uIHByb3Bvc2VkIGluIEkt RDo8YnI+DQpkcmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1wZC1wbWlwLTAxLnR4dCBhcyB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcg cG9pbnQgb2YgdGhpczxicj4NCmZlYXR1cmU/PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KWWVzICZuYnNwOyBbIF08YnI+ DQpObyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7WyBdPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KUGxlYXNlIHJlc3BvbmQgYnkgQXVndXN0 IDE4dGggb24gdGhlIE1MLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCi1DaGFpcnM8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpQbGVhc2Ugc2Vl IHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEgV0cgbWVldGluZyBvbiB0aGlzIHRvcGljIGF0 Ojxicj4NCmh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MvODEvbWludXRlcy9uZXRleHQu dHh0PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX188YnI+DQpuZXRleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0PGJyPg0KbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3Jn PGJyPg0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9uZXRleHQ8YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQo8L2ZvbnQ+PC90dD4NCjxicj4NCg== --=_alternative 002EFE85482578E9_=-- From pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com Thu Aug 11 01:42:43 2011 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 D7FF421F8B01 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:42:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, 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 tr7QxMdBYwll for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C534B21F889F for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 7B2026FCAFB; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:51:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 708F1958002; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:51:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:42:49 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:42:43 +0200 Message-ID: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F237@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> In-Reply-To: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F118328@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUXSlLQgAAH7lA= References: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F118328@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2011 08:42:49.0632 (UTC) FILETIME=[A6AB3A00:01CC5802] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 11 Aug 2011 08:42:43 -0000 Hi, I'm in favor of this document but I've one question: In the current version, the LMA makes decision to move flows and the MN follows that decision to forward packets on the right interface. However, during IETf80, we had good arguments in favour of the MN making decision to move flows.=20 So, the question is: do you plan, in this I-D, to consider also MN initiated mobility management or shall we consider only network initiated mobility ? Pierrick >=20 > Betreff: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6- > flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? >=20 > Hello, >=20 > At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility > As the starting point for > the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. > We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG > meeting with the following result: >=20 > In favor: 18 > Opposed: None >=20 > As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same > question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: >=20 > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 >=20 > -Chairs >=20 > IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From zhu.chunhui@zte.com.cn Thu Aug 11 01:44:19 2011 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 572C721F8B19; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:44:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.635 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.635 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, 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 TsNnYgCC+oUH; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:44:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE7B21F8B18; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.99] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 131323502467742; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:33:51 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.20] by [192.168.168.15] with StormMail ESMTP id 22013.5406157678; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:36:33 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p7B8aSmM063885; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:36:28 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhu.chunhui@zte.com.cn) In-Reply-To: To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: 709D66CA:BDEFFBC5-482578E9:002F0C81; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007 Message-ID: From: zhu.chunhui@zte.com.cn Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:36:17 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-08-11 16:36:29, Serialize complete at 2011-08-11 16:36:29 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 002F4E5C482578E9_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn p7B8aSmM063885 Cc: netext@ietf.org, netext-bounces@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 08:44:19 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 002F4E5C482578E9_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UTEuIFllcw0KUTIuIFllcw0KDQpCZXN0IFJlZ2FyZHMsDQpDaHVuaHVpDQoNCg0KDQoNCjxCYXNh dmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tPiANCreivP7IyzogIG5ldGV4dC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3Jn DQoyMDExLTA4LTExIDA1OjUxDQoNCsrVvP7Iyw0KPG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCrOty80NCg0K 1vfM4g0KW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IHNlbGVjdGl2ZSBJUHY0IG9mZmxv YWRpbmcgZmVhdHVyZSBhcyANCnNwZWNpZmllZCBpbiBJLUQgZHJhZnQtZ3VuZGF2ZWxsaS1uZXRl eHQtcG1pcHY2LXNpcHRvLW9wdGlvbg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCkF0IElFVEY4MSwgdGhlIE5l dGV4dCBXRyBkaXNjdXNzZWQgdGhlIHByb3Bvc2FsOiAiSVAgVHJhZmZpYyBPZmZsb2FkDQpTZWxl Y3RvciBPcHRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Ig0KPGRyYWZ0LWd1bmRhdmVsbGktbmV0 ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1zaXB0by1vcHRpb24tMDEudHh0Pg0KDQpBYnN0cmFjdA0KDQogICBUaGlzIHNw ZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5lcyBhIG1lY2hhbmlzbSBhbmQgYSByZWxhdGVkIG1vYmlsaXR5IG9w dGlvbg0KICAgZm9yIGNhcnJ5aW5nIElQIE9mZmxvYWQgdHJhZmZpYyBzZWxlY3RvcnMgYmV0d2Vl biBhIG1vYmlsZSBhY2Nlc3MNCiAgIGdhdGV3YXkgYW5kIGEgbG9jYWwgbW9iaWxpdHkgYW5jaG9y IGluIGEgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYgZG9tYWluLg0KICAgQmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVk IG9mZmxvYWQgZmxvdyBzZWxlY3RvcnMgZnJvbSB0aGUgbG9jYWwgbW9iaWxpdHkNCiAgIGFuY2hv ciwgYSBtb2JpbGUgYWNjZXNzIGdhdGV3YXkgY2FuIGVuYWJsZSBvZmZsb2FkIHRyYWZmaWMgcnVs ZSBvbg0KICAgdGhlIHNlbGVjdGVkIElQIGZsb3dzLg0KDQpQbGVhc2Ugbm90ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBv ZmZsb2FkaW5nIG9mIHRyYWZmaWMgZnJvbSB0aGUgTUFHIGlzIGxpbWl0ZWQgdG8NCklQdjQgZmxv dyBvbmx5IHVzaW5nIE5BVDQ0IGZ1bmN0aW9uYWxpdHkuDQoNClRoZSBnZW5lcmFsIGNvbnNlbnN1 cyBvZiB0aGUgcm9vbSBhdCB0aGUgSUVURjgxIFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2FzIHRoYXQNCnRoaXMgaXMg YSByZWxldmFudCBwcm9ibGVtIGFuZCBzaG91bGQgYmUgc29sdmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBXRy4gQXMgcGVy IHRoZQ0KbWludXRlczoNCiINCjExIHBlb3BsZSB0aGluayB3ZSBzaG91bGQgc29sdmUgdGhlIHBy b2JsZW0sIDQgdGhpbmsgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIG5vdC4NCiINCg0KQXMgcGVyIHByb2Nlc3MsIHRoZSBz YW1lIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGlzIG5vdyBiZWluZyBhc2tlZCBvbiB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0IFdHDQpNTCBiZWZv cmUgbWFraW5nIGEgZGVjaXNpb24uDQoNClF1ZXN0aW9uczoNCg0KMS4gSXMgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9u IHRvIG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgc3BlY2lmaWMgSVB2NCBmbG93cyBmcm9tIGEgTUFHIG9mDQppbnRlcmVz dCB0byB0aGUgV0c/DQoNClllcyAgIFsgXQ0KTm8gICAgWyBdDQoNCjIuIFNob3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9w dCBhcyBXRyBJLUQ6DQpkcmFmdC1ndW5kYXZlbGxpLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtc2lwdG8tb3B0aW9u LTAxLnR4dCB3aGljaCB3aWxsIHNlcnZlIGFzDQp0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lm eWluZyB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24/DQoNClllcyAgWyBdDQpObyAgIFsgXQ0KDQpQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9u ZCB0byB0aGUgYWJvdmUgcXVlc3Rpb25zIGJ5IEF1Z3VzdCAxOCwgMjAxMSBvbiB0aGUgTUwuDQoN Ci1DaGFpcnMNCg0KVGhlIHNsaWRlcyBwcmVzZW50ZWQgYXQgdGhlIG1lZXRpbmcgYXJlIGF2YWls YWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgSUVURjgxDQpwcm9jZWVkaW5ncy4gTWludXRlcyBoYXZlIGJlZW4gcG9zdGVk IHRvIHRoZSBNTCBhbmQgYXJlIGFsc28gYXZhaWxhYmxlDQphdDogaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9y Zy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQNCg0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KbmV0 ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4 dA0KDQoNCg0K --=_alternative 002F4E5C482578E9_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PHR0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9Mj5RMS4gWWVzPGJyPg0KUTIuIFllczwvZm9udD48L3R0Pg0K PGJyPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5CZXN0IFJlZ2FyZHMsPC9m b250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5DaHVuaHVpPC9mb250Pg0K PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRv cD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD0zNSU+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxiPiZsdDtC YXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tJmd0OzwvYj4NCjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXpl PTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+t6K8/sjLOiAmbmJzcDtuZXRleHQtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9y ZzwvZm9udD4NCjxwPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj4yMDExLTA4LTExIDA1 OjUxPC9mb250Pg0KPHRkIHdpZHRoPTY0JT4NCjx0YWJsZSB3aWR0aD0xMDAlPg0KPHRyIHZhbGln bj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNl cmlmIj7K1bz+yMs8L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2Vy aWYiPiZsdDtuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcmZ3Q7PC9mb250Pg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+ DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj6zrcvNPC9m b250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRkPg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0 Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj7W98ziPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRkPjxm b250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5bbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogQWRv cHQgc2VsZWN0aXZlDQpJUHY0IG9mZmxvYWRpbmcgZmVhdHVyZSBhcyBzcGVjaWZpZWQgaW4gSS1E IGRyYWZ0LWd1bmRhdmVsbGktbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1zaXB0by1vcHRpb248L2ZvbnQ+PC90YWJs ZT4NCjxicj4NCjx0YWJsZT4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPHRkPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8 YnI+PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj48dHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yPjxicj4NCjxicj4N CkF0IElFVEY4MSwgdGhlIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBkaXNjdXNzZWQgdGhlIHByb3Bvc2FsOiAmcXVvdDtJ UCBUcmFmZmljIE9mZmxvYWQ8YnI+DQpTZWxlY3RvciBPcHRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJ UHY2JnF1b3Q7PGJyPg0KJmx0O2RyYWZ0LWd1bmRhdmVsbGktbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1zaXB0by1v cHRpb24tMDEudHh0Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxicj4NCkFic3RyYWN0PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KICZuYnNwOyBU aGlzIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5lcyBhIG1lY2hhbmlzbSBhbmQgYSByZWxhdGVkIG1vYmls aXR5IG9wdGlvbjxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgZm9yIGNhcnJ5aW5nIElQIE9mZmxvYWQgdHJhZmZpYyBz ZWxlY3RvcnMgYmV0d2VlbiBhIG1vYmlsZSBhY2Nlc3M8YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7IGdhdGV3YXkgYW5k IGEgbG9jYWwgbW9iaWxpdHkgYW5jaG9yIGluIGEgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYgZG9tYWluLjxi cj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgQmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVkIG9mZmxvYWQgZmxvdyBzZWxlY3RvcnMg ZnJvbSB0aGUgbG9jYWwgbW9iaWxpdHk8YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7IGFuY2hvciwgYSBtb2JpbGUgYWNj ZXNzIGdhdGV3YXkgY2FuIGVuYWJsZSBvZmZsb2FkIHRyYWZmaWMgcnVsZQ0Kb248YnI+DQogJm5i c3A7IHRoZSBzZWxlY3RlZCBJUCBmbG93cy48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpQbGVhc2Ugbm90ZSB0aGF0IHRo ZSBvZmZsb2FkaW5nIG9mIHRyYWZmaWMgZnJvbSB0aGUgTUFHIGlzIGxpbWl0ZWQgdG88YnI+DQpJ UHY0IGZsb3cgb25seSB1c2luZyBOQVQ0NCBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5Ljxicj4NCjxicj4NClRoZSBn ZW5lcmFsIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBvZiB0aGUgcm9vbSBhdCB0aGUgSUVURjgxIFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2Fz IHRoYXQ8YnI+DQp0aGlzIGlzIGEgcmVsZXZhbnQgcHJvYmxlbSBhbmQgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHNvbHZl ZCBieSB0aGUgV0cuIEFzIHBlciB0aGU8YnI+DQptaW51dGVzOjxicj4NCiZxdW90Ozxicj4NCjEx IHBlb3BsZSB0aGluayB3ZSBzaG91bGQgc29sdmUgdGhlIHByb2JsZW0sIDQgdGhpbmsgd2Ugc2hv dWxkIG5vdC48YnI+DQomcXVvdDs8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpBcyBwZXIgcHJvY2VzcywgdGhlIHNhbWUg cXVlc3Rpb24gaXMgbm93IGJlaW5nIGFza2VkIG9uIHRoZSBOZXRleHQgV0c8YnI+DQpNTCBiZWZv cmUgbWFraW5nIGEgZGVjaXNpb24uPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KUXVlc3Rpb25zOjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjEu IElzIHRoZSBzb2x1dGlvbiB0byBvZmZsb2FkaW5nIHNwZWNpZmljIElQdjQgZmxvd3MgZnJvbSBh IE1BRyBvZjxicj4NCmludGVyZXN0IHRvIHRoZSBXRz88YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpZZXMgJm5ic3A7IFsg XTxicj4NCk5vICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtbIF08YnI+DQo8YnI+DQoyLiBTaG91bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQg YXMgV0cgSS1EOjxicj4NCmRyYWZ0LWd1bmRhdmVsbGktbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1zaXB0by1vcHRp b24tMDEudHh0IHdoaWNoIHdpbGwgc2VydmUgYXM8YnI+DQp0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4g c3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24/PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KWWVzICZuYnNwO1sgXTxicj4NCk5v ICZuYnNwOyBbIF08YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGUgYWJvdmUgcXVlc3Rp b25zIGJ5IEF1Z3VzdCAxOCwgMjAxMSBvbiB0aGUgTUwuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KLUNoYWlyczxicj4N Cjxicj4NClRoZSBzbGlkZXMgcHJlc2VudGVkIGF0IHRoZSBtZWV0aW5nIGFyZSBhdmFpbGFibGUg aW4gdGhlIElFVEY4MTxicj4NCnByb2NlZWRpbmdzLiBNaW51dGVzIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBwb3N0ZWQg dG8gdGhlIE1MIGFuZCBhcmUgYWxzbyBhdmFpbGFibGU8YnI+DQphdDogaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQ8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpf X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzxicj4NCm5ldGV4 dCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Q8YnI+DQpuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmc8YnI+DQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dDxicj4NCjxicj4NCjwvZm9udD48L3R0Pg0KPGJy Pg0K --=_alternative 002F4E5C482578E9_=-- From jiangdong345@gmail.com Thu Aug 11 02:22:36 2011 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 8D1F721F86B9 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:22:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 haZLbHj68qCV for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:22:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2E021F86AB for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye1 with SMTP id 1so831480iye.27 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:23:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=ovujoXsfuGSx+EDckpnxxY2HfUHcqXZipgX3j3XPVw0=; b=RFmYAeHAS9VAI8vS8Beh+d7I6QlLE1reJ8jsv1IuVbOJ2618hCkz6zQdVt4T7/HskT 4+D/m059OCRpsz5KxC8B8Y6JCO87JrRtgI+CmzRNBD+YbzIXrpzce1F652Tbpsoxj+tQ wfINYD3XeuRSm5sSwUMv3/gxBIJYo4wUnyUiU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.4.92 with SMTP id 28mr7027702ibq.33.1313054589533; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.13.141 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:23:09 +0800 Message-ID: From: Jiang Dong To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151773d674613f9d04aa3758be Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 09:22:36 -0000 --00151773d674613f9d04aa3758be Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Q1. Yes Q2. Yes Best Regards! Jiang Dong ---------------------------------------------------------------------- At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Abstract This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IP flows. Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the minutes: " 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. " As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML before making a decision. Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. -Chairs The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt --00151773d674613f9d04aa3758be Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Q1. Yes
Q2. Yes

Best Regards!
Jiang Dong

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload
Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6"
<draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt>

Abstract

   This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option
   for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access
   gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain.
   Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility
   anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on
   the selected IP flows.

Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to
IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality.

The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that
this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the
minutes:
"
11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not.
"

As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG
ML before making a decision.

Questions:

1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of
interest to the WG?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

2. Should we adopt as WG I-D:
draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as
the starting point in specifying the solution?

Yes  [ ]
No   [ ]

Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML.

-Chairs

The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81
proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available
at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt


--00151773d674613f9d04aa3758be-- From jiangdong345@gmail.com Thu Aug 11 02:26:19 2011 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 03B9121F877D for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 Q1Ud+CNts6Qu for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E12C21F86BE for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye1 with SMTP id 1so836669iye.27 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=m4hq6t0nBaTLyRpeYddTw/wRe4GcEjYawhB0kG465Lg=; b=wU/GLzWjhBTtyrOcI1LGV8HLkBWUEJNCHW6RnhOeMyO+4NiZrKJ6piLFN+2Z5HMjki vrm4v7t9D3HmwjhzCqZeTTY9LkaqL9mkMocLPfhJw3ETSo+KNTTivHKvtjz0i6YSGnZf VZUTk0YIuP+blmmPh31T+Zd2+AcjNrDnfXl08= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.116.28 with SMTP id k28mr12257058ibq.7.1313054812101; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.13.141 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:26:52 +0800 Message-ID: From: Jiang Dong To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636920306a55b7a04aa376579 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 09:26:19 -0000 --001636920306a55b7a04aa376579 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Q1. Yes Q2. Yes Best Regards, JiangDong ------------------------------------------------------------------------- At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6" General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature and observed the following: " Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 How many have read it: 7 How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting point to work on the problem? In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 " We are now following up with the questions on the ML. Question to WG: 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this feature? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th on the ML. -Chairs Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt --001636920306a55b7a04aa376579 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Q1. Yes
Q2. Yes

Best Regards,
JiangDong

-----------= --------------------------------------------------------------
At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "= ;Prefix Delegation for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ; =A0Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes =A0 [ ]
No =A0 =A0[ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes =A0 [ ]
No =A0 =A0[ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:
http://ww= w.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt

--001636920306a55b7a04aa376579-- From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Thu Aug 11 05:10:19 2011 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 EC67F21F85FF for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 05:10:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.174 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.174 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, 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 06apLD8DDqF5 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 05:10:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail53.telekom.de (tcmail53.telekom.de [217.5.214.110]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4E121F89BE for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 05:10:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he110889.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.92.130]) by tcmail51.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 11 Aug 2011 14:08:07 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([169.254.4.241]) by HE110889.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::841f:f92c:15ca:8526%16]) with mapi; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:08:07 +0200 From: To: , Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:08:06 +0200 Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6VIS+vHAvnEiUyuG4wvA5tZB5UXiaig Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F1185D8@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 12:10:20 -0000 Q1: Yes Q2: Yes Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the ph= rase 'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router without= extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ... Thanks! Regards Dirk [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mob= ile IPv6? At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6" General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature and observed the following: " Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 How many have read it: 7 How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting point to work on the problem? In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 " We are now following up with the questions on the ML. Question to WG: 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this feature? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th on the ML. -Chairs Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From jong-hyouk.lee@inria.fr Thu Aug 11 06:50:09 2011 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 94A5921F8AFA for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:50:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.626 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 zkhi0LUuMw6n for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05C5421F8AF8 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:50:07 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,355,1309730400"; d="scan'208";a="115594124" Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com ([209.85.220.172]) by mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 11 Aug 2011 15:50:40 +0200 Received: by vxi29 with SMTP id 29so2056419vxi.31 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:50:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.23.2 with SMTP id i2mr10162347vdf.412.1313070639320; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:50:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.181.100 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:50:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F1185D8@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F1185D8@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> From: Jong-Hyouk Lee Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:50:19 +0200 Message-ID: To: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307d024c058f4e04aa3b155c Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 13:50:09 -0000 --20cf307d024c058f4e04aa3b155c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Q1: Yes. Q2: Yes. Comments: As pointed, the use cases should be provided and personally I would like to introduce the following articles recently published: 1. Lightweight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems", IEEE Systems Journal: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681 2. Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork MObility for Intelligent Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949 Cheers. On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM, wrote: > Q1: Yes > Q2: Yes > Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the > phrase > 'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router without > extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ... > > Thanks! > > Regards > Dirk > > > [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? > > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > and observed the following: > > " > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > How many have read it: 7 > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > point to work on the problem? > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > " > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > -- IMARA Team, INRIA, France. Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ --20cf307d024c058f4e04aa3b155c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Q1: Yes.
Q2: Yes.

Comments: As pointed, the us= e cases should be provided and personally I would like to introduce the fol= lowing articles recently published:

1.=C2=A0Lightw= eight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems", IEEE= Systems Journal:=C2=A0http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681
2.=C2=A0Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork MObility for Inte= lligent Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Techno= logy:=C2=A0http://dx= .doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949

Cheers.

On Thu, Aug 1= 1, 2011 at 2:08 PM, <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> wrote:
Q1: Yes
Q2: Yes
Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the ph= rase
'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router wit= hout extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ..= .

Thanks!

Regards
Dirk


[netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mob= ile IPv6?


At IETF81, Carl Williams presented = the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ; =C2=A0Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes =C2=A0 [ ]
No =C2=A0 =C2=A0[ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes =C2=A0 [ ]
No =C2=A0 =C2=A0[ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt


_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext



--
IMARA Team,= INRIA, France.
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and = /dev/random.

#email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee = (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/
--20cf307d024c058f4e04aa3b155c-- From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Thu Aug 11 09:17:12 2011 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 5FE0921F862F for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:17:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.161 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.161 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.438, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 C1UyoqUaIULg for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:17:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3CEC21F861A for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:17:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh102.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.23]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7BGHf1J022547; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:17:45 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:17:41 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-002.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.57) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:17:40 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-002.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.57]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:17:40 +0200 From: To: , Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUXo+YA//+70IA= Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:17:40 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1313076100.50864.YahooMailNeo@web111411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.60.140] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2011 16:17:41.0657 (UTC) FILETIME=[31FBC090:01CC5842] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 16:17:12 -0000 Behcet, This is the Netext WG which is responsible for working on extensions to the network based mobility protocol, I.e PMIP6. The proposal to offload IPv4 flows from the MAG was presented at IETF81 and there is WG interest in solving this problem. We are not trying to develop protocols and extensions to PMIP6 that are comparable to MIP6 just to be on par. The extension and feature would be taken up if it makes sense. I have asked for consensus on 3 topics. Prefix delegation is one of them. I don=B9t understand what you mean when you say 'NEMO-PD is somehow stuck between the two". -Raj On 8/11/11 10:21 AM, "ext Behcet Sarikaya" wrote: >Hi Raj, > Can I ask why we need to work on this (SIPTO), and QoS for PMIPv6? >Do we have a charter item? >Does MIPv6 support them so that we can justify saying that we want to be >at par? > >I notice that NEMO-PD has somehow been stuck into the above two? > >Regards, > >Behcet > > > > >>=20 >>=20 >> At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload >> Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" >> >>=20 >> Abstract >>=20 >> This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option >> for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access >> gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. >> Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility >> anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on >> the selected IP flows. >>=20 >> Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to >> IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. >>=20 >> The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that >> this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the >> minutes: >> " >> 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. >> " >>=20 >> As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG >> ML before making a decision. >>=20 >> Questions: >>=20 >> 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of >> interest to the WG? >>=20 >> Yes [ ] >> No [ ] >>=20 >> 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: >> draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as >> the starting point in specifying the solution? >>=20 >> Yes [ ] >> No [ ] >>=20 >> Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. >>=20 >> -Chairs >>=20 >> The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 >> proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available >> at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> From behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com Thu Aug 11 08:21:07 2011 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 8E26521F8AD1 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:21:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.699, 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 8-2qZajvdaXl for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm6-vm3.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm6-vm3.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.136]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E10A321F85B9 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.48] by nm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Aug 2011 15:21:41 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.175] by tm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Aug 2011 15:21:41 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1031.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Aug 2011 15:21:41 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 332007.75868.bm@omp1031.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 59264 invoked by uid 60001); 11 Aug 2011 15:21:41 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1313076100; bh=hk5XXkWs5DNpwzn5lYLkvdvaoMBSIzjVuO8UC9+8I3c=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=QUiBdRY/i+PY24xfIFXWQuxmZKNDle0FqXsUbCQuh6Y9OwpthIxmbN2l6edW2YHK6euszhKgbdrudBfy02Nxh9gL5CUqSoUa9Bvujd6sJunSeqUFWFjOsb1eeZeCDJ6IovHwFvqPNnahEB6+858Omhg8oP1aj6Ro90/TIiN3Md4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=VOALXHPktB6MXgTx/JuMs7BLgoQ5JZdIQIUr+GC68Ee5DSXixhqzId25Gy8QDL0A1/rIZLdq10hHbMyzIo8v9BMNY5BlHaBccUixtbIQf/oQoxgiWhfmtEabJvTbJUruOeuqIz1Krokv7W19rDjyaLdzR5js5+d7ptpivUvDuUY=; X-YMail-OSG: pwhz5tQVM1nTbfGatvkrSX8RF0SU0JCT54epFQojtyI_YFX mHZzCAsV17dAph4UzKTkzQK13_wmGIOTEAkxd.EwG1OkqZGDrkc6XNbxPEXt cjs5JYymIbnoxlGZGvse8YyYJ6dRA6pBx64ZAPfm2NqyGfGTb0cTovZ3MmoI 2Jzkdy5K5T5n2IqDxA7yqzi8ehkOkMcTINIxSkfLZpkSDA9UNN3tLIOZTPjb .lHvXWuN_sIf9BvzXCFo4BWoO9AIHMpx1e0rWEkOMc671Ovfckd_UXCWooPX bdZ4eBFzEwanizjVg3BBUeP6_puxBr8XW_Z9JJpG1srXL4KQc4MOPIV0aJv5 GV3pSt0puE7C0tyvrRGuYIaJ6kDVLkGz2UU1vEOh9L22igTwkX1TbKzVvfEN 8oBUvoJDSs0enE6c41lgYCUKmHz7HQxMmuxoTgZSR3ISdbEdDF9VJIuy.1o4 c4ZjtPFM- Received: from [50.58.7.243] by web111411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:21:40 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.113.313619 References: Message-ID: <1313076100.50864.YahooMailNeo@web111411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:21:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Behcet Sarikaya To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:19:10 -0700 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya 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, 11 Aug 2011 15:21:07 -0000 Hi Raj,=0A=A0 Can I ask why we need to work on this (SIPTO), and QoS for PM= IPv6?=0ADo we have a charter item?=0ADoes MIPv6 support them=A0 so that we = can justify saying that we want to be at par?=0A=0AI notice that NEMO-PD ha= s somehow been stuck into the above two?=0A=0ARegards,=0A=0ABehcet=0A=0A=0A= =0A=0A> =0A> =0A> At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traf= fic Offload=0A> Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6"=0A> =0A> =0A> Abstract=0A> =0A> =A0 This s= pecification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option=0A> =A0 for= carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access=0A> =A0 gat= eway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain.=0A> =A0 Ba= sed on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility=0A> =A0 = anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on=0A> =A0= the selected IP flows.=0A> =0A> Please note that the offloading of traffi= c from the MAG is limited to=0A> IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality.= =0A> =0A> The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was th= at=0A> this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per th= e=0A> minutes:=0A> "=0A> 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 thi= nk we should not.=0A> "=0A> =0A> As per process, the same question is now b= eing asked on the Netext WG=0A> ML before making a decision.=0A> =0A> Quest= ions:=0A> =0A> 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a = MAG of=0A> interest to the WG?=0A> =0A> Yes=A0 [ ]=0A> No=A0 =A0 [ ]=0A> = =0A> 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D:=0A> draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto= -option-01.txt which will serve as=0A> the starting point in specifying the= solution?=0A> =0A> Yes=A0 [ ]=0A> No=A0 [ ]=0A> =0A> Please respond to th= e above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML.=0A> =0A> -Chairs=0A> =0A> T= he slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81=0A> proceedi= ngs. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available=0A> at: http= ://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt=0A> =0A> =0A> ___________= ____________________________________=0A> netext mailing list=0A> netext@iet= f.org=0A> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext=0A> From carlw@mcsr-labs.org Thu Aug 11 11:29:02 2011 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 B747421F8BA8 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:29:02 -0700 (PDT) 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 NwG+SnIYftrw for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail150c38.carrierzone.com (mail150c38.carrierzone.com [66.175.56.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 020ED21F8B56 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:29:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Authenticated-User: carlw.mcsr-labs.org Received: from carlwPCstudio ([69.241.25.0]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail150c38.carrierzone.com (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p7BITUSI010961; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:29:33 +0000 From: "Carl Williams" To: , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:29:37 -0400 Message-ID: <003301cc5854$a36df010$ea49d030$@org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUX+dGg Content-Language: en-us X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=1.1 cv=JVcfv8PVBzkSbII2sFYrMKLz19MaNQlQHCvFHjSqRjY= c=1 sm=1 a=_1Z_vZwYX2EA:10 a=Gzqcop6RMF0A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=8wjbuZIaoH7ngIPs8+0CXA==:17 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=9qxNCY_qAAAA:8 a=fB8zmgpMq2DwXNBCGBMA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=1pxjJC3EenQA:10 a=8wjbuZIaoH7ngIPs8+0CXA==:117 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 18:29:02 -0000 Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [X] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [X] No [ ] -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:52 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Abstract This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IP flows. Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the minutes: " 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. " As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML before making a decision. Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. -Chairs The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From carlw@mcsr-labs.org Thu Aug 11 11:32:20 2011 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 76E6A21F8C11 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:32:20 -0700 (PDT) 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=[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 5cxurIyGLT6r for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:32:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail123c38.carrierzone.com (mail123c38.carrierzone.com [66.175.56.153]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F0221F8C06 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:32:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Authenticated-User: carlw.mcsr-labs.org Received: from carlwPCstudio ([69.241.25.0]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail123c38.carrierzone.com (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p7BIWmie017785; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:32:51 +0000 From: "Carl Williams" To: , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:32:55 -0400 Message-ID: <003401cc5855$188d2730$49a77590$@org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UX+oEA Content-Language: en-us X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=1.1 cv=WQrBSZ4NjBgfqVSntgMbVm2UG0GnfJPX7he+wznYkhY= c=1 sm=1 a=E6zb3jqczcYA:10 a=Gzqcop6RMF0A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=8wjbuZIaoH7ngIPs8+0CXA==:17 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=9qxNCY_qAAAA:8 a=kg9fgBTStnormgiTEcMA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=1pxjJC3EenQA:10 a=8wjbuZIaoH7ngIPs8+0CXA==:117 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 18:32:20 -0000 Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [x] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [x] No [ ] -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:08 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Was discussed at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: " 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please respond to the following questions: Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [ ] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. -Chairs _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From yokota@kddilabs.jp Thu Aug 11 15:56:19 2011 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 E463C11E809C for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:56:19 -0700 (PDT) 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 0rkTci9zpGL1 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [IPv6:2001:200:601:12::16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A1311E8092 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F8A317480C4 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:56:53 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddilabs.jp Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25c1tYMTIG8u for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:56:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.145]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E1317480B9 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:56:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (Mugi.mn.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.29]) by ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B6421B9AC for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:55:09 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4E445E33.3080802@kddilabs.jp> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:56:51 +0900 From: Hidetoshi Yokota User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 22:56:20 -0000 Hi Raj, > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] Regards, -- Hidetoshi (2011/08/11 6:34), Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote: > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > and observed the following: > > " > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > How many have read it: 7 > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > point to work on the problem? > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > " > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > > From yokota@kddilabs.jp Thu Aug 11 15:57:56 2011 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 8C00411E809C for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:57:56 -0700 (PDT) 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=[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 26n5pgd8XCII for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [IPv6:2001:200:601:12::16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1414211E80A9 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24B1517481F2 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:58:31 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddilabs.jp Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sycLOhbOKU2Q for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:58:30 +0900 (JST) Received: from ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.145]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E957D174813D for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:58:30 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (Mugi.mn.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.29]) by ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4BD21B9AC for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:56:46 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4E445E94.7090800@kddilabs.jp> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:58:28 +0900 From: Hidetoshi Yokota User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 11 Aug 2011 22:57:56 -0000 Hi Raj, I support this I-D: (2011/08/11 6:51), Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote: > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of > interest to the WG? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as > the starting point in specifying the solution? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] Regards, -- Hidetoshi From yokota@kddilabs.jp Thu Aug 11 16:02:20 2011 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 8087D21F86C4 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:02:20 -0700 (PDT) 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 WthgFzOhc7Eq for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:02:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [IPv6:2001:200:601:12::16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096DA21F86C3 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:02:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B43417481FA for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:02:55 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddilabs.jp Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lIpp2TCEmj+D for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:02:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.145]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2346174813D for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:02:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (Mugi.mn.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.29]) by ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB21F1B9AC for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:01:10 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4E445F9C.1000500@kddilabs.jp> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:02:52 +0900 From: Hidetoshi Yokota User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 11 Aug 2011 23:02:20 -0000 Hi Raj, I also support this I-D: (2011/08/11 7:08), Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote: > Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI > option as described in I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] > > Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting > point for working on this feature in the WG? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] Regards, -- Hidetoshi From yokota@kddilabs.jp Thu Aug 11 16:05:16 2011 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 1050D21F8AC3 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:05:16 -0700 (PDT) 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=[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 wSBEaRzlDOeT for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [IPv6:2001:200:601:12::16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E0ED21F86E6 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B0A17481FE for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:05:50 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddilabs.jp Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q3ue8uvMmrLT for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:05:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.145]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC88C17481FC for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:05:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (Mugi.mn.mip.kddilabs.jp [172.19.90.29]) by ultra.mip.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE1611B9AC for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:04:05 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4E44604B.40805@kddilabs.jp> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:05:47 +0900 From: Hidetoshi Yokota User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 11 Aug 2011 23:05:16 -0000 Hi Raj, This is also good work and has been long discussed. I think it's time to progress. (2011/08/11 6:19), Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote: > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? > > Yes [X] > No [ ] Regards, -- Hidetoshi From jinho.kim.bv@nttdocomo.com Thu Aug 11 17:48:53 2011 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 C439D11E8089 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:48:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, 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 tRAlAtkcv5y5 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcsg-mailro11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp [202.19.227.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 001E211E8080 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcsg-mailmt11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailmt10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.41]) by zcsg-mailro11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A82934004 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from zcsg-mailmi11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailmi10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.49]) by zcsg-mailmt11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (NTT DoCoMo Mail System) with SMTP id <0LPS00DVNI9WFIA0@NTTDoCoMo.co.jp> for netext@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from unknown (HELO zcsg-mailvs15.is.nttdocomo.co.jp) (10.160.86.48) by 0 with SMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 Received: from zcsg-mailvs15.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 727A98003; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from zcsg-mailsa11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailsa10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.46]) by zcsg-mailvs15.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675CE8002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from akkimuj222 (akkimuj222.docomo.docomogr.net [10.18.132.66]) by zcsg-mailsa11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (NTT DoCoMo Mail System) with ESMTPA id <0LPS009W8I9SK7E0@NTTDoCoMo.co.jp>; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:04 +0900 From: Jinho Kim In-reply-to: <003301cc5854$a36df010$ea49d030$@org> To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Message-id: <002201cc5889$a2344480$e69ccd80$%kim.bv@nttdocomo.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: ja Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Thread-index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUX+dGggABpg3A= X-DoCoMo: ZCSG References: <003301cc5854$a36df010$ea49d030$@org> Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 12 Aug 2011 00:48:53 -0000 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [O] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [O] No [ ] Best regards, Jinho Kim -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:52 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Abstract This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IP flows. Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the minutes: " 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. " As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML before making a decision. Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. -Chairs The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From jinho.kim.bv@nttdocomo.com Thu Aug 11 17:48:54 2011 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 6361611E8080 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:48:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, 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 gFET7wK841ZX for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcsg-mailro12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp [202.19.227.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C90C311E809B for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcsg-mailmt12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailmt10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.41]) by zcsg-mailro12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B728F34004 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from zcsg-mailmi13.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailmi10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.49]) by zcsg-mailmt12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (NTT DoCoMo Mail System) with SMTP id <0LPS00E1WI9W3QE0@NTTDoCoMo.co.jp> for netext@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from unknown (HELO zcsg-mailvs11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp) (10.160.86.48) by 0 with SMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 Received: from zcsg-mailvs11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9263020003; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from zcsg-mailsa11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailsa10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.46]) by zcsg-mailvs11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8736C20002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from akkimuj222 (akkimuj222.docomo.docomogr.net [10.18.132.66]) by zcsg-mailsa11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (NTT DoCoMo Mail System) with ESMTPA id <0LPS009W8I9SK7E0@NTTDoCoMo.co.jp>; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:08 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:49:05 +0900 From: Jinho Kim In-reply-to: <003401cc5855$188d2730$49a77590$@org> To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Message-id: <002301cc5889$a2dda3e0$e898eba0$%kim.bv@nttdocomo.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: ja Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Thread-index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UX+oEAgABoGCA= X-DoCoMo: ZCSG References: <003401cc5855$188d2730$49a77590$@org> Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 12 Aug 2011 00:48:54 -0000 Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [O] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [O] No [ ] Best regards, Jinho Kim -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:08 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Was discussed at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: " 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please respond to the following questions: Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [ ] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. -Chairs _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From cjbc@it.uc3m.es Thu Aug 11 20:46:10 2011 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 AA02421F850B for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 nToFh0ZpkV7M for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9743721F86BB for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:09 -0700 (PDT) X-uc3m-safe: yes Received: from [10.0.2.4] (modemcable093.1-80-70.mc.videotron.ca [70.80.1.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DC8704A45; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 05:46:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano To: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com In-Reply-To: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F237@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> References: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F118328@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F237@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-hmvskdUIsj4+TqlkXv2G" Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 05:46:42 +0200 Message-ID: <1313120802.14232.19.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-6.8.0.1017-18318.003 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 03:46:10 -0000 --=-hmvskdUIsj4+TqlkXv2G Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Pierrick, I think that once the draft becomes WG document, as long as it fits in the charter, it's up to the WG to decide if MN initiated mobility should be also considered. Thanks, Carlos On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 10:42 +0200, pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I'm in favor of this document but I've one question: >=20 > In the current version, the LMA makes decision to move flows and the MN > follows that decision to forward packets on the right interface. > However, during IETf80, we had good arguments in favour of the MN making > decision to move flows.=20 >=20 > So, the question is: do you plan, in this I-D, to consider also MN > initiated mobility management or shall we consider only network > initiated mobility ? >=20 > Pierrick >=20 > >=20 > > Betreff: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6- > > flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? > >=20 > > Hello, > >=20 > > At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile > IPv6 > > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility > > As the starting point for > > the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. > > We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG > > meeting with the following result: > >=20 > > In favor: 18 > > Opposed: None > >=20 > > As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same > > question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: > >=20 > > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: > > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the > > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy > > Mobile IPv6? > >=20 > > Yes [ ] > > No [ ] > >=20 > >=20 > > -Chairs > >=20 > > IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: > > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > netext mailing list > > netext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > _______________________________________________ > > netext mailing list > > netext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext --=20 Carlos Jes=FAs Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/ GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67 --=-hmvskdUIsj4+TqlkXv2G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk5EoiIACgkQNdy6TdFwT2cm0gCgoI3wbqhiQuHZoNACHRvmnu8Z s9oAoKXWFdGEV1bm/uyNtUcS5I3oXPNU =zisl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-hmvskdUIsj4+TqlkXv2G-- From thumax9@gmail.com Thu Aug 11 22:11:21 2011 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 D1AF221F86D0 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:11:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 2SLobooEBt-7 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7EE721F86BA for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye1 with SMTP id 1so1274191iye.27 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:10:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=3MTFOheVN0Oc1emArQO5LXAlKEgqb6EM91C01Mp488k=; b=h40ncx4DmwXYlPb3zxttiM8zkABeupRJys7I7edJsZjyHsLwUM/YXPPS6IWVnOl+ih Zh6gMdkl5Z9kQvtlGkofCPejnBrfYZ273S6HSfmKVdebgN+Dq0WT+hCSOFrZLZo/uyn6 hVy0CBLWE2Pd2icuvDHKTbmKafVZj1Jcm19tk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.167.72 with SMTP id r8mr535441icy.131.1313125853727; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:10:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.177.136 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:10:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:10:53 +0800 Message-ID: From: =?GB2312?B?wu3m5w==?= To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6134e20e8c8404aa47f083 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 12 Aug 2011 05:11:22 -0000 --90e6ba6134e20e8c8404aa47f083 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Q1. Yes Q2. Yes Best Regards! Xiao Ma ---------------------------------------------------------------------- At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Abstract This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IP flows. Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the minutes: " 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. " As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML before making a decision. Questions: 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of interest to the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as the starting point in specifying the solution? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. -Chairs The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt --90e6ba6134e20e8c8404aa47f083 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Q1. Yes
Q2. Yes

Best Regards!
Xiao Ma

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload
Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6"
<draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt>

Abstract

   This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option
   for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access
   gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain.
   Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility
   anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on
   the selected IP flows.

Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to
IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality.

The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that
this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the
minutes:
"
11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not.
"

As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG
ML before making a decision.

Questions:

1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of
interest to the WG?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

2. Should we adopt as WG I-D:
draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as
the starting point in specifying the solution?

Yes  [ ]
No   [ ]

Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML.

-Chairs

The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81
proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available
at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt

--90e6ba6134e20e8c8404aa47f083-- From thumax9@gmail.com Thu Aug 11 22:35:33 2011 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 296B621F856A for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:35:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 1teIf9Lrafh2 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:35:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946F821F8548 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:35:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye1 with SMTP id 1so1305895iye.27 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:33:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=lXNLq4bxZy2oXZJ2MwAzxo21HD3RB4BvO7IrwfA6fv0=; b=HHXKRQicFO/Wrw+kZ9cVnaiHJGgZfOWXLk4Bd7lshyj8bVNAk9dgYTYB9F9Yq3uIjb 4zVARaF07rjyPPgWYrBiJ2Ff+l1hxrVeWPemkpCj9LUAc+sEixowuQ6yDS2kXqRoE3ah w9igE09ON/qXjpWQuibrfhlHJ6a2V9WgSq7r4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.23.200 with SMTP id t8mr563766icb.198.1313127196163; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.177.136 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:33:16 +0800 Message-ID: From: =?GB2312?B?wu3m5w==?= To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf301d3da6127eef04aa4840ca Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 12 Aug 2011 05:35:33 -0000 --20cf301d3da6127eef04aa4840ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Q1. Yes Q2. Yes Best Regards, Xiao Ma ------------------------------------------------------------------------- At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6" General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature and observed the following: " Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 How many have read it: 7 How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting point to work on the problem? In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 " We are now following up with the questions on the ML. Question to WG: 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this feature? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th on the ML. -Chairs Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt --20cf301d3da6127eef04aa4840ca Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Q1. Yes
Q2. Yes

Best Regards,
Xiao Ma

-------------------------------= ------------------------------------------
At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation = for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ; =A0Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes =A0 [ ]
No =A0 =A0[ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes =A0 [ ]
No =A0 =A0[ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt

--20cf301d3da6127eef04aa4840ca-- From jinho.kim.bv@nttdocomo.com Fri Aug 12 02:01:40 2011 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 7422021F85B1 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 02:01:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, 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 sApGHYihUVpA for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 02:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcsg-mailro11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp [202.19.227.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B80221F85A1 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 02:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcsg-mailmt11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailmt10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.41]) by zcsg-mailro11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C97A34003 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from zcsg-mailmi12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailmi10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.49]) by zcsg-mailmt11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (NTT DoCoMo Mail System) with SMTP id <0LPT00AQK53ILA50@NTTDoCoMo.co.jp> for netext@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from unknown (HELO zcsg-mailvs12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp) (10.160.86.48) by 0 with SMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:06 +0900 Received: from zcsg-mailvs12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0708F8003; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from zcsg-mailsa11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (zcsg-mailsa10.is.nttdocomo.co.jp [10.160.86.46]) by zcsg-mailvs12.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFDBA8002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:05 +0900 (JST) Received: from akkimuj222 (akkimuj222.docomo.docomogr.net [10.18.132.66]) by zcsg-mailsa11.is.nttdocomo.co.jp (NTT DoCoMo Mail System) with ESMTPA id <0LPT002MI53F78H0@NTTDoCoMo.co.jp>; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:05 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:02:02 +0900 From: Jinho Kim In-reply-to: To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org Message-id: <009401cc58ce$80946d60$81bd4820$%kim.bv@nttdocomo.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: ja Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Thread-index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUY7aEQ X-DoCoMo: ZCSG References: Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 09:01:40 -0000 Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Yes [O] No [ ] Best regards, Jinho Kim -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 6:19 AM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Hello, At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility As the starting point for the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG meeting with the following result: In favor: 18 Opposed: None As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Yes [ ] No [ ] -Chairs IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com Fri Aug 12 09:02:27 2011 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 F269421F8546 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:02:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.591 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.591 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.592, BAYES_50=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 GBSu8ACDuI98 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm5-vm0.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com (nm5-vm0.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com [98.139.91.204]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8682C21F8540 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.139.91.66] by nm5.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Aug 2011 16:03:04 -0000 Received: from [98.139.91.52] by tm6.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Aug 2011 16:03:04 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1052.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Aug 2011 16:03:04 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 219259.91418.bm@omp1052.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 73551 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Aug 2011 16:03:03 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1313164983; bh=fw6qxHVrDkv8SF5GdVAoBZcsx8gcirHzueqyxMFaq+k=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=3nuPTMoYAklZOkv/+LR0N+unnA5eWJCOeeLdEim1peap8zMf236/gKqPniF/3S3ovlFdu0Vh9yy+Wla2JkItmx79Uhu+JVGpiJ2LL3bhFhT9x8gjOMfQ4KyqiO8fGZA0hwtaAW3cjlpBIvv/gv4URRQnCNpjfg0zVHGEcOAgWjY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=BCalPUiluBp9t8dClRqb3FKqasF55HUMtvNZnWGZl3GEueeV7LKkuOq+D/p2wVNqToMtg0Rsf8RxaAwhtneC6i0UnmqpIoLsVcd34Rj1uVSfqS8NZhXNrz52eEg+AFu7xDpS2Jg5pfLpS4244n2wD2yOoKcrliFdlRY7bQ7R7L0=; X-YMail-OSG: 4RR8AVQVM1miLTq7GyiY7.A5ltIFyksK01djglRRm9i6aTd M9wtozbY2hU6HPsAfDXPbER10YFzhlrA3gcgpYqjtJTlxXMPCIbxckeXgDLL cXSdBMICU1KyEOizEyWj6N1G767ynFDZmbuym9knfS.tyXR5p8QTCeKDY5aF aNRsEMwfzmo5kCdC9XXVjizqfsbcOBI.APQ18UygW2STA6r790aWS5jJGO4v 9gEm_IZywc5.gC_ZI1QrWetNUQ4S3fkZpO8ZFwcPKOmIln2fTtCnCR7Uhmly hXxTQyPAsvTlK_nSA4_t1ypOT1tKBpI0MWbsmD9ay7Y5QODPWH0IIh5zZTmp XzyeuXfXi0sAciJReM3bVAqeg_9wUHjfGBHgaENR5u9m7kbQRQ5u8TrrDcFt tgB77lFzJl1dTf59_6trzZHTMGzA_mu99EFT.Q1uAqtOKrCKtfEnHH3ASG3f ppA92Dg-- Received: from [50.58.7.243] by web111403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:03:03 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.113.313619 References: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F118328@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F237@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> <1313120802.14232.19.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> Message-ID: <1313164983.67430.YahooMailNeo@web111403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:03:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Behcet Sarikaya To: "cjbc@it.uc3m.es" , "pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com" In-Reply-To: <1313120802.14232.19.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya 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, 12 Aug 2011 16:02:27 -0000 Hi Carlos, > Hi Pierrick, > > I think that once the draft becomes WG document, as long as it fits in > the charter, it's up to the WG to decide if MN initiated mobility should > be also considered. You mean by modifying MN? It could be. These days everything is possible :-). Regards, Behcet From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 09:25:45 2011 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 0642D21F8888 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:25:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.387 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.387 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.388, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, 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 I1Jw93PqFlcm for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4038621F8786 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CGQJK1026465; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:26:20 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:26:19 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.61) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:26:18 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:26:18 +0200 From: To: , Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUXSlLQgAAH7lCAASHYAIAAgGWA Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 16:26:17 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1313120802.14232.19.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <4E76245F8B2375489A8BFD36CA6CDF64@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 16:26:19.0030 (UTC) FILETIME=[90C65B60:01CC590C] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 16:25:45 -0000 The charter is quite explicit about not venturing into any extensions that require MN changes. Hence I would say that MN initiated flow mobility is OUT OF SCOPE for this work item. -Raj On 8/11/11 10:46 PM, "ext Carlos Jes=FAs Bernardos Cano" wrote: >Hi Pierrick, > >I think that once the draft becomes WG document, as long as it fits in >the charter, it's up to the WG to decide if MN initiated mobility should >be also considered. > >Thanks, > >Carlos > >On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 10:42 +0200, pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com >wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> I'm in favor of this document but I've one question: >>=20 >> In the current version, the LMA makes decision to move flows and the MN >> follows that decision to forward packets on the right interface. >> However, during IETf80, we had good arguments in favour of the MN making >> decision to move flows. >>=20 >> So, the question is: do you plan, in this I-D, to consider also MN >> initiated mobility management or shall we consider only network >> initiated mobility ? >>=20 >> Pierrick >>=20 >> >=20 >> > Betreff: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D >> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6- >> > flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? >> >=20 >> > Hello, >> >=20 >> > At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile >> IPv6 >> > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility >> > As the starting point for >> > the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. >> > We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG >> > meeting with the following result: >> >=20 >> > In favor: 18 >> > Opposed: None >> >=20 >> > As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same >> > question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: >> >=20 >> > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: >> > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the >> > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy >> > Mobile IPv6? >> >=20 >> > Yes [ ] >> > No [ ] >> >=20 >> >=20 >> > -Chairs >> >=20 >> > IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: >> > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >> >=20 >> > _______________________________________________ >> > netext mailing list >> > netext@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> > _______________________________________________ >> > netext mailing list >> > netext@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > >--=20 >Carlos Jes=FAs Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/ >GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67 From julien.ietf@gmail.com Fri Aug 12 10:54:46 2011 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 CEB4711E8080 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:54:46 -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 unY-AiMpqyuz for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:54:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0817121F86B9 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so2665139wyg.31 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:55:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i4Qrn0fUb+u7+DRDiYctjcMFeCxTIOBL2pmb2LXNIRc=; b=neWIK9brKmSOAT5ffsLUE3s49AVjbNfZOWEWBg9q7eK3pR5cJYCySN9786wZ2timVN WeD5OQbdHypTRTGsv0378A1QPxxRat2LWHVsjwEk2ztHxwViS4cs+njHDRseiPm2DUg6 Vu9l0qlvsguVznZ3vIXq8w0gMnkFwedP8OG0k= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.38.164 with SMTP id b36mr1143816wbe.54.1313171723154; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:55:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.59.147 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:55:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:55:22 -0700 Message-ID: From: Julien Laganier To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 17:54:46 -0000 Hello Raj, While parts of this document are reasonable extensions to the PMIPv6 protocol, I have indicated repeatedly that I had a fundamental issue with the other part of the document that lets the LMA unilaterally decides to move flows. To my recollection this issue was never properly addressed and thus I am surprised to see that same draft again on the table for adoption. I understand the desire of this group to make progress, but i do not think it is fair to put for adoption as the baseline a version of the draft that has a fundamental and unaddressed issue that is controversial within the group. As a result I' d like to request that the draft be revised to remove that controversial feature before it is adopted. I believe this is the best way forward to make long overdue progress. In the current state of affairs I am accordingly answering to your question as below: > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? > > Yes =A0[ ] > No =A0 =A0[ X ] --julien On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:19 PM, wrote: > Hello, > > At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv= 6 > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility > As the starting point for > the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. > We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG > meeting with the following result: > > In favor: 18 > Opposed: None > > As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same > question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: > > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? > > Yes =A0 [ ] > No =A0 =A0[ ] > > > -Chairs > > IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > From sfaccin@rim.com Fri Aug 12 11:08:29 2011 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 B761811E8083 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:08:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 KPVeZf4683cT for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhs060cnc.rim.net (mhs060cnc.rim.net [208.65.73.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96DB911E808D for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:08:27 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 0a41282f-b7cd4ae0000005d0-88-4e456c31b919 Received: from XHT105CNC.rim.net (xht105cnc.rim.net [10.65.12.216]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mhs060cnc.rim.net (SBG) with SMTP id 65.D9.01488.13C654E4; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:08:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from XCT105ADS.rim.net (10.67.111.46) by XHT105CNC.rim.net (10.65.12.216) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.159.2; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:09:04 -0400 Received: from XMB101ADS.rim.net ([fe80::cce5:67de:a150:3c3b]) by XCT105ADS.rim.net ([fe80::2d01:2041:eea3:819b%22]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:09:03 -0500 From: Stefano Faccin To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMWRkG8Y7+19x4BkufDKp6FcHwxZUZgtIg Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:09:03 +0000 Message-ID: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED00185BF@XMB101ADS.rim.net> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.70.110.253] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" content-transfer-encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrAKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXC5chzQ9cwx9XP4N8xU4uW9d1sFtd+PmV3 YPJYsuQnk8fdW5eYApiiGhhtEvPy8ksSS1IVUlKLk22VfFLTE3MUAooyyxKTKxVcMouTcxIz c1OLlBQyU2yVTJQUCnISk1NzU/NKbJUSCwpS81KU7LgUMIANUFlmnkJqXnJ+SmZeuq2SZ7C/ roWFqaWuoZKdLhJI+MedsafrK2NBl1jF3JdfWRsYD4h2MXJySAiYSJw4MpcZwhaTuHBvPVsX IxeHkEAvk8SpVb9ZIJxljBJTp1yCcrYySsy/8JMJpIVNQE1iyfO1QO0cHCIC1hLz+pJAwswC 6hK35p9lAbGFBXIkpq37zApiiwjkSsx/94gNwjaSOHnkDVicRUBV4kDzZXYQm1fATWL/xL9g vUICtRKvmn4zgticAoESb7/MAFvLCHTp91NrmCB2iUvcejKfCeIDAYkle85DfSMq8fLxP1YI W1FiUed3RpAzmQU0Jdbv0odoVZSY0v0Qaq2gxMmZT6DWykhMfLyYZQKjxCwkG2YhdM9C0j0L SfcCRpZVjIK5GcUGZgbJecl6RZm5enmpJZsYwUlFQ38HY99erUOMAhyMSjy8LxJd/YRYE8uK K3MPMUpwMCuJ8Ha9dvET4k1JrKxKLcqPLyrNSS0+xGgBDJ+JzFLcyfnAhJdXEm9sYIDCURLn DZY28BMSSAemr+zU1ILUIphWJg5OqQZG6107mY4V1Ysk7RRa8yqVd4ZSxFKH41c0bkkbX+Zo /L6l4eC9CzE9TK/N51lJNAVwrl19fPYvuXmvjO9uuhrncpVZTedj4EPPo6bnW7M8X2lUTJVX 2uj2RDvOsKfHtrPmdOn+za+XOS+balCTt9krYdumBzyHrKoDV2eJTzhVZNgctr4iKdBYiaU4 I9FQi7moOBEAbJ1UjUMDAAA= Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:08:29 -0000 SGVsbG8gUmFqLA0KSSBjYW5ub3QgaGVscCBidXQgc3VwcG9ydCBKdWxpZW4ncyB2aWV3LiBI ZSBpcyBjb3JyZWN0IHRoYXQgc29tZSBwb2ludHMgd2VyZSByYWlzZWQgbm90IG9uY2UsIG5v dCB0d2ljZSwgYnV0IHNldmVyYWwgdGltZXMsIGFuZCBoYXZlIHN0aWxsIG5vdCBiZWVuIGFk ZHJlc3NlZC4gDQoNCk15IGFuc3dlciB0byB5b3VyIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGlzIA0KDQo+IFE6IFNo b3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBOZXRleHQgV0cgSS1EIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudDoNCj4gZHJhZnQt YmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQg YXMgdGhlDQo+IHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IGluIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgdGhlIGZsb3cgbW9iaWxp dHkgZmVhdHVyZSBmb3IgUHJveHkNCj4gTW9iaWxlIElQdjY/DQo+DQpZZXMgIFsgICAgXQ0K Tm8gICAgWyBYIF0NCg0KQ2hlZXJzLA0KU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCg0KU3RhbmRhcmRzIE1h bmFnZXINClJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbiANCjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRl IERyaXZlIA0KQnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQpJcnZpbmcsIFRl eGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQSANCk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQoNCk9mZmljZTogKDk3Mikg OTEwIDM0NTHCoCANCkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0NTENCk1vYmlsZSA6ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4 NDIyDQp3d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tIA0KDQoNCg0K74GQIENvbnNp ZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQoNCg0KDQpPbiBXZWQsIEF1 ZyAxMCwgMjAxMSBhdCAyOjE5IFBNLCAgPEJhc2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20+IHdy b3RlOg0KPiBIZWxsbywNCj4NCj4gQXQgSUVURjgxIHRoZSBjaGFpcnMgbWFkZSBhIHByb3Bv c2FsIHRvIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIEktRDogUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYNCj4gRXh0ZW5zaW9u cyB0byBTdXBwb3J0IEZsb3cgTW9iaWxpdHkNCj4gPGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQt cG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDM+IEFzIHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBmb3INCj4gdGhlIHNw ZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5pbmcgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmb3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQ djYuDQo+IFdlIGdhdWdlZCBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBhbmQgYWdhaW5zdCBhZG9wdGluZyB0aGlz IEktRCBhdCB0aGUgSUVURjgxIFdHDQo+IG1lZXRpbmcgd2l0aCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHJl c3VsdDoNCj4NCj4gSW4gZmF2b3I6IDE4DQo+IE9wcG9zZWQ6IE5vbmUNCj4NCj4gQXMgcGVy IHByb2Nlc3Mgd2UgYXJlIGZvbGxvd2luZyB1cCBvbiB0aGUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IHdpdGgg dGhlIHNhbWUNCj4gcXVlc3Rpb24uIFBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIGJ5IEF1ZyAxOHRoLCAyMDEx IHRvIHRoZSBxdWVzdGlvbiBiZWxvdzoNCj4NCj4gUTogU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIE5l dGV4dCBXRyBJLUQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Og0KPiBkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBt aXB2Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAzIHdoaWNoIHdpbGwgYmUgdXNlZCBhcyB0aGUNCj4gc3RhcnRpbmcg cG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQcm94 eQ0KPiBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCj4NCj4gWWVzIMKgIFsgXQ0KPiBObyDCoCDCoFsgXQ0KPg0K Pg0KPiAtQ2hhaXJzDQo+DQo+IElFVEY4MSBXRyBtaW51dGVzIGFyZSBwb3N0ZWQgYXQ6DQo+ IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MvODEvbWludXRlcy9uZXRleHQudHh0 DQo+DQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQo+IG5ldGV4dCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8v d3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlz dA0KbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3Rp bmZvL25ldGV4dA0KDQotLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NClRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNs dWRpbmcgYW55IGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgaW5mb3Jt YXRpb24sIHByaXZpbGVnZWQgbWF0ZXJpYWwgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBtYXRlcmlhbCBwcm90ZWN0 ZWQgYnkgdGhlIHNvbGljaXRvci1jbGllbnQgb3Igb3RoZXIgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBwcml2aWxl Z2VzKSwgb3IgY29uc3RpdHV0ZSBub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9m IHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gYnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4gdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJl Y2lwaWVudCBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkLiBJZiB5b3UgaGF2ZSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzIHRyYW5z bWlzc2lvbiBpbiBlcnJvciwgcGxlYXNlIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBzZW5k ZXIgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZSB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwg ZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiwgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBvciByZXByb2R1Y3Rpb24gb2YgdGhpcyB0 cmFuc21pc3Npb24gYnkgdW5pbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnRzIGlzIG5vdCBhdXRob3JpemVk IGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5sYXdmdWwuDQo= From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 11:12:43 2011 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 6338511E8087 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:12:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.666 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, 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 gPtDi1w6HPGh for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:12:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-sa02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5603311E808B for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:12:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh106.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.32]) by mgw-sa02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CIDHbP008889; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:13:17 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:13:12 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-005.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.60) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:13:12 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-005.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.60]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:13:11 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUA//+xJQA= Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:13:12 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 18:13:12.0917 (UTC) FILETIME=[7FBFD850:01CC591B] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:12:43 -0000 Hi Julien, On 8/12/11 12:55 PM, "ext Julien Laganier" wrote: >Hello Raj, > >While parts of this document are reasonable extensions to the PMIPv6 >protocol, I have indicated repeatedly that I had a fundamental issue >with the other part of the document that lets the LMA unilaterally >decides to move flows. I don=B9t believe there is this fundamental issue that (you mention) is a show-stopper in the case of flow mobility for PMIP6. My recollection from previous discussions is that the LMA makes the decision to move a flow based on some policy which is either locally configured or obtains from an external entity. You may disagree with that approach. We can discuss this issue further and ensure that it is either fairly resolved through the tracker. My suggestion would be for you to write up this issue and upload it to the tracker and we will resolve it to the satisfaction of the WG members. > >To my recollection this issue was never properly addressed and thus I >am surprised to see that same draft again on the table for adoption. All issues and concerns related to flow mobility for PMIP6 will be addressed. The document will not progress until every issue has been resolved. But at the moment we are not making any progress at all. The I-D that we are asking for adoption here will only serve as the starting point for all debates and I hoping that we will make better progress in resolving the issues and improving the I-D through the process of capturing issues in the tracker and proposing solutions and text that is satisfactory to all. Without a formal process, we will be discussing the same set of issues over and over with no forward progress. > >I understand the desire of this group to make progress, but i do not >think it is fair to put for adoption as the baseline a version of the >draft that has a fundamental and unaddressed issue that is >controversial within the group. IMO there is no fundamental issue with the proposal (but maybe I have not understood your concern and the issue). Can you please write-up this issue and we can discuss on the list? > >As a result I' d like to request that the draft be revised to remove >that controversial feature before it is adopted. I believe this is the >best way forward to make long overdue progress. That is one option. Lets discuss what this controversial feature that you refer to is and we can make a decision on whether to deprecate it before WG adoption. If there are some earlier emails where this issue has been already discussed, please do send me (and the list) a pointer. -Raj >In the current state >of affairs I am accordingly answering to your question as below: > >> Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: >> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the >> starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy >> Mobile IPv6? >> >> Yes [ ] >> No [ X ] > >--julien > >On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:19 PM, wrote: >> Hello, >> >> At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile >>IPv6 >> Extensions to Support Flow Mobility >> As the starting point for >> the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6. >> We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG >> meeting with the following result: >> >> In favor: 18 >> Opposed: None >> >> As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same >> question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: >> >> Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: >> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the >> starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy >> Mobile IPv6? >> >> Yes [ ] >> No [ ] >> >> >> -Chairs >> >> IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 11:19:18 2011 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 2361511E8088 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:19:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.162 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.162 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.437, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 aPB2Tfs+b128 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090C511E8087 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CIJo6Z017726; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:19:52 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:19:39 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.61) by NOK-am1MHUB-02.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:19:38 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:19:38 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgA== Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:19:38 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED00185BF@XMB101ADS.rim.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 18:19:39.0184 (UTC) FILETIME=[65FB8300:01CC591C] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:19:18 -0000 DQpIaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KDQpBcyBJIHJlcGxpZWQgdG8gSnVsaWVuLCBJIHJlYWxpemUgdGhhdCB3 ZSBoYXZlIGRpc2N1c3NlZCBzZXZlcmFsIGFzcGVjdHMNCm9mIHRoZSBJLUQgbXVsdGlwbGUgdGlt ZXMuIEJ1dCBJIGRvIG5vdCBiZWxpZXZlIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBpc3N1ZXMgd2hpY2gNCmNvdWxkIGJl IHRlcm1lZCBhcyAiZnVuZGFtZW50YWwiIHRvIHRoZSBwcm90b2NvbC4NCkhlbmNlIG15IHN1Z2dl c3Rpb24gd291bGQgYmUgZm9yIGZvbGtzIHRvIHJhaXNlIHRoZXNlIGlzc3VlcyB0aHJvdWdoIHRo ZQ0KdHJhY2tlciBpbiBhIGZvcm1hbCBtYW5uZXIgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgdGhleSBhcmUgcmVz b2x2ZWQgdG8gdGhlDQpzYXRpc2ZhY3Rpb24gb2YgYWxsLiBQbGVhc2UgdGFrZSB0aGUgdGltZSB0 byBmcmFtZSB5b3VyIGNvbmNlcm5zIGFuZA0KaXNzdWVzIG9uIHRoZSBNTCBhbmQgdGhyb3VnaCB0 aGUgaXNzdWUgdHJhY2tlci4NCg0KLVJhag0KDQpPbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6MDkgUE0sICJleHQgU3Rl ZmFubyBGYWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+SGVsbG8gUmFqLA0KPkkg Y2Fubm90IGhlbHAgYnV0IHN1cHBvcnQgSnVsaWVuJ3Mgdmlldy4gSGUgaXMgY29ycmVjdCB0aGF0 IHNvbWUgcG9pbnRzDQo+d2VyZSByYWlzZWQgbm90IG9uY2UsIG5vdCB0d2ljZSwgYnV0IHNldmVy YWwgdGltZXMsIGFuZCBoYXZlIHN0aWxsIG5vdA0KPmJlZW4gYWRkcmVzc2VkLiANCj4NCj5NeSBh bnN3ZXIgdG8geW91ciBxdWVzdGlvbiBpcw0KPg0KPj4gUTogU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIE5l dGV4dCBXRyBJLUQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Og0KPj4gZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlw djYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQgYXMgdGhlDQo+PiBzdGFydGluZyBwb2lu dCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZlYXR1cmUgZm9yIFByb3h5DQo+PiBN b2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCj4+DQo+WWVzICBbICAgIF0NCj5ObyAgICBbIFggXQ0KPg0KPkNoZWVycywN Cj5TdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPg0KPlN0YW5kYXJkcyBNYW5hZ2VyDQo+UmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90 aW9uIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uDQo+NTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUgRHJpdmUNCj5CdWlsZGluZyA2LCBCcmF6 b3MgRWFzdCwgU3RlLiAxMDANCj5JcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQQ0KPk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0 ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQo+DQo+T2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5MTAgMzQ1MQ0KPkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0 NTENCj5Nb2JpbGUgOiAoNTEwKSAyMzAgODQyMg0KPnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJy eS5jb20NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj7vgZAgQ29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IGJlZm9yZSBwcmlu dGluZy4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj5PbiBXZWQsIEF1ZyAxMCwgMjAxMSBhdCAyOjE5IFBNLCAgPEJhc2F2 YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPj4gSGVsbG8sDQo+Pg0KPj4gQXQgSUVURjgx IHRoZSBjaGFpcnMgbWFkZSBhIHByb3Bvc2FsIHRvIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIEktRDogUHJveHkgTW9i aWxlDQo+PklQdjYNCj4+IEV4dGVuc2lvbnMgdG8gU3VwcG9ydCBGbG93IE1vYmlsaXR5DQo+PiA8 ZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMz4gQXMgdGhlIHN0YXJ0aW5n IHBvaW50IGZvcg0KPj4gdGhlIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5pbmcgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBm b3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYuDQo+PiBXZSBnYXVnZWQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgYW5kIGFnYWlu c3QgYWRvcHRpbmcgdGhpcyBJLUQgYXQgdGhlIElFVEY4MSBXRw0KPj4gbWVldGluZyB3aXRoIHRo ZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgcmVzdWx0Og0KPj4NCj4+IEluIGZhdm9yOiAxOA0KPj4gT3Bwb3NlZDogTm9u ZQ0KPj4NCj4+IEFzIHBlciBwcm9jZXNzIHdlIGFyZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXAgb24gdGhlIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdCB3aXRoIHRoZSBzYW1lDQo+PiBxdWVzdGlvbi4gUGxlYXNlIHJlc3BvbmQgYnkgQXVn IDE4dGgsIDIwMTEgdG8gdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGJlbG93Og0KPj4NCj4+IFE6IFNob3VsZCB3ZSBh ZG9wdCBhcyBOZXRleHQgV0cgSS1EIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudDoNCj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1u ZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4gc3Rh cnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQ cm94eQ0KPj4gTW9iaWxlIElQdjY/DQo+Pg0KPj4gWWVzICAgWyBdDQo+PiBObyAgICBbIF0NCj4+ DQo+Pg0KPj4gLUNoYWlycw0KPj4NCj4+IElFVEY4MSBXRyBtaW51dGVzIGFyZSBwb3N0ZWQgYXQ6 DQo+PiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0ZXMvbmV0ZXh0LnR4 dA0KPj4NCj4+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQo+PiBuZXRleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+PiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+IGh0dHBzOi8v d3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+Pg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+bmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0K Pm5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v bmV0ZXh0DQo+DQo+LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+VGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gKGluY2x1ZGluZyBh bnkgYXR0YWNobWVudHMpIG1heSBjb250YWluIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbA0KPmluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBw cml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZQ0K PnNvbGljaXRvci1jbGllbnQgb3Igb3RoZXIgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBwcml2aWxlZ2VzKSwgb3IgY29u c3RpdHV0ZQ0KPm5vbi1wdWJsaWMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24uIEFueSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1h dGlvbiBieSBhbnlvbmUgb3RoZXIgdGhhbg0KPnRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJv aGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0KPnRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBpbiBlcnJv ciwgcGxlYXNlIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBzZW5kZXIgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZQ0KPnRo aXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZnJvbSB5b3VyIHN5c3RlbS4gVXNlLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCBkaXN0 cmlidXRpb24sIG9yDQo+cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50 ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QNCj5hdXRob3JpemVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5sYXdmdWwu DQoNCg== From sfaccin@rim.com Fri Aug 12 11:28:32 2011 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 9509A21F8634 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 1Q+lN75U7DEh for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:28:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhs061cnc.rim.net (mhs061cnc.rim.net [208.65.73.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683DF21F85AB for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:28:31 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 0a412830-b7b93ae0000070b3-a8-4e4570eb4ba3 Received: from XHT104CNC.rim.net (xht104cnc.rim.net [10.65.22.52]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mhs061cnc.rim.net (SBG) with SMTP id BF.C9.28851.BE0754E4; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:28:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from XHT141CNC.rim.net (10.65.22.70) by XHT104CNC.rim.net (10.65.22.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.159.2; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:29:08 -0400 Received: from XCT104ADS.rim.net (10.67.111.45) by XHT141CNC.rim.net (10.65.22.70) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.8; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:29:08 -0400 Received: from XMB101ADS.rim.net ([fe80::cce5:67de:a150:3c3b]) by XCT104ADS.rim.net ([fe80::90f9:3b89:1d94:aa9b%22]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:29:06 -0500 From: Stefano Faccin To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgIAAdZtw Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:29:05 +0000 Message-ID: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018607@XMB101ADS.rim.net> References: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED00185BF@XMB101ADS.rim.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.70.110.253] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" content-transfer-encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrLKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXC5Shmovu6wNXPYFmHjUXL+m42i2s/n7I7 MHksWfKTyePurUtMAUxRDYw2iXl5+SWJJakKKanFybZKPqnpiTkKAUWZZYnJlQoumcXJOYmZ ualFSgqZKbZKJkoKBTmJyam5qXkltkqJBQWpeSlKdlwKGMAGqCwzTyE1Lzk/JTMv3VbJM9hf 18LC1FLXUMlOFwkk/OPOONH3gqVgl27F78lPGRsYl+h0MXJySAiYSMyf8ZcJwhaTuHBvPVsX IxeHkEAPk8SOZQeYIZwljBKTPp9ngnCWMUp0ruphgXC2Mkr877zBDtLPJqAmseT5WqAWDg4R AWuJeX1JIGFmAXWJW/PPsoDYwgI5EtPWfWYFsUUEciXmv3vEBmG7Sax9d4kZxGYRUJWY8GwK WA0vUPzAm+9gvUICxRI7Fx8DW8UpYC6x7c1FsBpGoLO/n1rDBLFLXOLWk/lQ7whILNlznhnC FpV4+fgfK4StKLGo8zsjyJnMApoS63fpQ7QqSkzpfsgOsVZQ4uTMJ1BrZSQmPl7MMoFRchaS DbMQumch6Z6FpHsBI8sqRsHcjGIDM8PkvGS9osxcvbzUkk2M4HSjYbCDccJerUOMAhyMSjy8 YYmufkKsiWXFlbmHGCU4mJVEeLteu/gJ8aYkVlalFuXHF5XmpBYfYrQAhs9EZinu5HxgKswr iTc2MEDhKInzhkkb+AkJpAMTW3ZqakFqEUwrEwenVANjfcLhix9vbDDZ1PT++K66TxvTbm0r 3iR47tO6mesnbD2/sPyix7bQP2kbLq28/GTNgkt9y4pOKnbe5N/r/rbVeIHYjlOMipKrJ0v+ q32weEZ2TUTLa/GtV5Nf3QrRk/6yQpfzy9RfBwusf1y4VNo4e0n19qL381t2X1DSnsNyVP/S p+y7pl05+1yUWIozEg21mIuKEwH+rtLVUAMAAA== Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:28:32 -0000 UmFqLA0KTWF5IEkgYXNrIGEgcXVlc3Rpb24gcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBwcm9jZXNzPyBZb3Ug Y2xhaW0gdGhlIGlzc3VlcyBhcmUgbm90IHNob3cgc3RvcHBlcnMuIExldCdzIGFzc3VtZSB3 ZSBwcm9jZWVkIGFuZCBoYW5kbGUgdGhlbSBpbiB0aGUgZGF0YSB0cmFja2VyIHRvIGRpc3Nh dGlzZmFjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGUgcGVvcGxlIHJhaXNpbmcgdGhlbS4gV2hhdCB0aGVuPyBIb3cg d291bGQgeW91IGFjaGlldmUgcHJvZ3Jlc3MgdGhlbj8NCg0KU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCg0K U3RhbmRhcmRzIE1hbmFnZXINClJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbiANCjUw MDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlIA0KQnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAw DQpJcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQSANCk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQoNCk9m ZmljZTogKDk3MikgOTEwIDM0NTHCoCANCkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0NTENCk1vYmlsZSA6 ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4NDIyDQp3d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tIA0KDQoN Cg0K74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQoNCg0K LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IEJhc2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tp YS5jb20gW21haWx0bzpCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tXSANClNlbnQ6IEZyaWRh eSwgQXVndXN0IDEyLCAyMDExIDExOjIwIEFNDQpUbzogU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCkNjOiBu ZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDog QWRvcHQgSS1EIGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMg TmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCg0KDQpIaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KDQpBcyBJIHJlcGxpZWQgdG8gSnVs aWVuLCBJIHJlYWxpemUgdGhhdCB3ZSBoYXZlIGRpc2N1c3NlZCBzZXZlcmFsIGFzcGVjdHMN Cm9mIHRoZSBJLUQgbXVsdGlwbGUgdGltZXMuIEJ1dCBJIGRvIG5vdCBiZWxpZXZlIHRoZXJl IGFyZSBpc3N1ZXMgd2hpY2gNCmNvdWxkIGJlIHRlcm1lZCBhcyAiZnVuZGFtZW50YWwiIHRv IHRoZSBwcm90b2NvbC4NCkhlbmNlIG15IHN1Z2dlc3Rpb24gd291bGQgYmUgZm9yIGZvbGtz IHRvIHJhaXNlIHRoZXNlIGlzc3VlcyB0aHJvdWdoIHRoZQ0KdHJhY2tlciBpbiBhIGZvcm1h bCBtYW5uZXIgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgdGhleSBhcmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgdG8gdGhlDQpzYXRp c2ZhY3Rpb24gb2YgYWxsLiBQbGVhc2UgdGFrZSB0aGUgdGltZSB0byBmcmFtZSB5b3VyIGNv bmNlcm5zIGFuZA0KaXNzdWVzIG9uIHRoZSBNTCBhbmQgdGhyb3VnaCB0aGUgaXNzdWUgdHJh Y2tlci4NCg0KLVJhag0KDQpPbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6MDkgUE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBGYWNj aW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+SGVsbG8gUmFqLA0KPkkgY2Fubm90 IGhlbHAgYnV0IHN1cHBvcnQgSnVsaWVuJ3Mgdmlldy4gSGUgaXMgY29ycmVjdCB0aGF0IHNv bWUgcG9pbnRzDQo+d2VyZSByYWlzZWQgbm90IG9uY2UsIG5vdCB0d2ljZSwgYnV0IHNldmVy YWwgdGltZXMsIGFuZCBoYXZlIHN0aWxsIG5vdA0KPmJlZW4gYWRkcmVzc2VkLiANCj4NCj5N eSBhbnN3ZXIgdG8geW91ciBxdWVzdGlvbiBpcw0KPg0KPj4gUTogU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0 IGFzIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBJLUQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Og0KPj4gZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5l dGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQgYXMgdGhlDQo+PiBz dGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZlYXR1cmUg Zm9yIFByb3h5DQo+PiBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCj4+DQo+WWVzICBbICAgIF0NCj5ObyAgICBb IFggXQ0KPg0KPkNoZWVycywNCj5TdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPg0KPlN0YW5kYXJkcyBNYW5h Z2VyDQo+UmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90aW9uIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uDQo+NTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUg RHJpdmUNCj5CdWlsZGluZyA2LCBCcmF6b3MgRWFzdCwgU3RlLiAxMDANCj5JcnZpbmcsIFRl eGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQQ0KPk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQo+DQo+T2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcy KSA5MTAgMzQ1MQ0KPkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0NTENCj5Nb2JpbGUgOiAoNTEwKSAyMzAg ODQyMg0KPnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJyeS5jb20NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj7vgZAg Q29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IGJlZm9yZSBwcmludGluZy4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj5P biBXZWQsIEF1ZyAxMCwgMjAxMSBhdCAyOjE5IFBNLCAgPEJhc2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tp YS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPj4gSGVsbG8sDQo+Pg0KPj4gQXQgSUVURjgxIHRoZSBjaGFpcnMg bWFkZSBhIHByb3Bvc2FsIHRvIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIEktRDogUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlDQo+PklQ djYNCj4+IEV4dGVuc2lvbnMgdG8gU3VwcG9ydCBGbG93IE1vYmlsaXR5DQo+PiA8ZHJhZnQt YmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMz4gQXMgdGhlIHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBv aW50IGZvcg0KPj4gdGhlIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5pbmcgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBm b3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYuDQo+PiBXZSBnYXVnZWQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgYW5kIGFn YWluc3QgYWRvcHRpbmcgdGhpcyBJLUQgYXQgdGhlIElFVEY4MSBXRw0KPj4gbWVldGluZyB3 aXRoIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgcmVzdWx0Og0KPj4NCj4+IEluIGZhdm9yOiAxOA0KPj4gT3Bw b3NlZDogTm9uZQ0KPj4NCj4+IEFzIHBlciBwcm9jZXNzIHdlIGFyZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXAg b24gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCB3aXRoIHRoZSBzYW1lDQo+PiBxdWVzdGlvbi4gUGxlYXNl IHJlc3BvbmQgYnkgQXVnIDE4dGgsIDIwMTEgdG8gdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGJlbG93Og0KPj4N Cj4+IFE6IFNob3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBOZXRleHQgV0cgSS1EIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudDoN Cj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgd2hpY2ggd2ls bCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4gc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUg ZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQcm94eQ0KPj4gTW9iaWxlIElQdjY/DQo+Pg0K Pj4gWWVzICAgWyBdDQo+PiBObyAgICBbIF0NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4gLUNoYWlycw0KPj4NCj4+ IElFVEY4MSBXRyBtaW51dGVzIGFyZSBwb3N0ZWQgYXQ6DQo+PiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0ZXMvbmV0ZXh0LnR4dA0KPj4NCj4+IF9fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+PiBuZXRleHQgbWFp bGluZyBsaXN0DQo+PiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3Jn L21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+Pg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+bmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPm5ldGV4 dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0 ZXh0DQo+DQo+LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+VGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gKGluY2x1ZGlu ZyBhbnkgYXR0YWNobWVudHMpIG1heSBjb250YWluIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbA0KPmluZm9ybWF0 aW9uLCBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVk IGJ5IHRoZQ0KPnNvbGljaXRvci1jbGllbnQgb3Igb3RoZXIgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBwcml2aWxl Z2VzKSwgb3IgY29uc3RpdHV0ZQ0KPm5vbi1wdWJsaWMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24uIEFueSB1c2Ug b2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBieSBhbnlvbmUgb3RoZXIgdGhhbg0KPnRoZSBpbnRlbmRl ZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0K PnRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBpbiBlcnJvciwgcGxlYXNlIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IHJlcGx5IHRvIHRo ZSBzZW5kZXIgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZQ0KPnRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZnJvbSB5b3VyIHN5c3Rl bS4gVXNlLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24sIG9yDQo+cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9u IG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QN Cj5hdXRob3JpemVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5sYXdmdWwuDQoNCg0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t DQpUaGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFueSBhdHRhY2htZW50cykgbWF5IGNv bnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50aWFsIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChp bmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZSBzb2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9y IG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUgbm9uLXB1Ymxp YyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGJ5IGFueW9uZSBv dGhlciB0aGFuIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91 IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1l ZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlv biBmcm9tIHlvdXIgc3lzdGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiwg b3IgcmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVj aXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QgYXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0K From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 11:36:29 2011 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 D53BE21F86C0 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:36:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.184 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.415, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 APlb+59aHHCo for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:36:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4DD721F86BE for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:36:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CIb3HG031865; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:37:04 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:36:58 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.56) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:36:58 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.56]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:36:57 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgIAAdZtw//+PPYA= Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:36:57 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018607@XMB101ADS.rim.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 18:36:58.0597 (UTC) FILETIME=[D1855950:01CC591E] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:36:30 -0000 DQpIaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KDQpUaGUgY2hhaXJzIHdpbGwgbW9uaXRvciB0aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBj bG9zZWx5IGFuZCBhbnkgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb25zDQp0byB0aGUgaXNzdWVzIHRoYXQgYXJl IHJhaXNlZC4gVW5sZXNzIHdlKGNoYWlycyksIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2luZyB0aGUNCmlzc3Vl LCBhcyB3ZWxsIGFzIHRoZSBXRyBtZW1iZXJzLCBhcmUgbm90IHNhdGlzZmllZCB3aXRoIHRoZSBy ZXNvbHV0aW9uIHdlDQp3aWxsIG5vdCBwcm9ncmVzcyB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQuDQpUaGUgcG9pbnQg YWJvdXQgdGhlIHByb2Nlc3MgaGVyZSBpcyB0aGF0IGF0IHRoZSBtb21lbnQgd2UgYXJlIHNwaW5u aW5nDQp3aGVlbHMgd2l0aG91dCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IGZvcndhcmQgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuIFdpdGggYSBt b3JlIGZvcm1hbCBhcHByb2FjaCB0bw0KdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYW5kIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgdG9v bHMsIHdlIGhvcGUgdG8gYXZvaWQgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMgdGhhdCBhcmUNCmluIGFuIHVuZW5kaW5n IGxvb3AuIEkgZG8gaG9wZSB0aGF0IGZvbGtzIHdobyByYWlzZSBpc3N1ZXMgYXJlIGFsc28NCndp bGxpbmcgdG8gbGlzdGVuIHRvIHNvbHV0aW9ucyB3aXRoIGFuIG9wZW4gbWluZC4NCg0KLVJhag0K DQpPbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6MjkgUE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5j b20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+UmFqLA0KPk1heSBJIGFzayBhIHF1ZXN0aW9uIHJlZ2FyZGluZyB0aGUg cHJvY2Vzcz8gWW91IGNsYWltIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMgYXJlIG5vdA0KPnNob3cgc3RvcHBlcnMuIExl dCdzIGFzc3VtZSB3ZSBwcm9jZWVkIGFuZCBoYW5kbGUgdGhlbSBpbiB0aGUgZGF0YQ0KPnRyYWNr ZXIgdG8gZGlzc2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2luZyB0aGVtLiBXaGF0IHRo ZW4/IEhvdw0KPndvdWxkIHlvdSBhY2hpZXZlIHByb2dyZXNzIHRoZW4/DQo+DQo+U3RlZmFubyBG YWNjaW4NCj4NCj5TdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KPlJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3Jh dGlvbg0KPjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0 ZS4gMTAwDQo+SXJ2aW5nLCBUZXhhcyA3NTAzOSBVU0ENCj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0K Pg0KPk9mZmljZTogKDk3MikgOTEwIDM0NTENCj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+TW9iaWxl IDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0MjINCj53d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tDQo+DQo+ DQo+DQo+74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+DQo+ DQo+LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj5Gcm9tOiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9r aWEuY29tIFttYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbV0NCj5TZW50OiBGcmlkYXks IEF1Z3VzdCAxMiwgMjAxMSAxMToyMCBBTQ0KPlRvOiBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPkNjOiBuZXRl eHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0 IEktRA0KPmRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0 IFdHIGRvYz8NCj4NCj4NCj5IaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KPg0KPkFzIEkgcmVwbGllZCB0byBKdWxpZW4s IEkgcmVhbGl6ZSB0aGF0IHdlIGhhdmUgZGlzY3Vzc2VkIHNldmVyYWwgYXNwZWN0cw0KPm9mIHRo ZSBJLUQgbXVsdGlwbGUgdGltZXMuIEJ1dCBJIGRvIG5vdCBiZWxpZXZlIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBpc3N1 ZXMgd2hpY2gNCj5jb3VsZCBiZSB0ZXJtZWQgYXMgImZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIiB0byB0aGUgcHJvdG9j b2wuDQo+SGVuY2UgbXkgc3VnZ2VzdGlvbiB3b3VsZCBiZSBmb3IgZm9sa3MgdG8gcmFpc2UgdGhl c2UgaXNzdWVzIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlDQo+dHJhY2tlciBpbiBhIGZvcm1hbCBtYW5uZXIgdG8gZW5z dXJlIHRoYXQgdGhleSBhcmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgdG8gdGhlDQo+c2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9mIGFsbC4g UGxlYXNlIHRha2UgdGhlIHRpbWUgdG8gZnJhbWUgeW91ciBjb25jZXJucyBhbmQNCj5pc3N1ZXMg b24gdGhlIE1MIGFuZCB0aHJvdWdoIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSB0cmFja2VyLg0KPg0KPi1SYWoNCj4NCj5P biA4LzEyLzExIDE6MDkgUE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb20+ IHdyb3RlOg0KPg0KPj5IZWxsbyBSYWosDQo+PkkgY2Fubm90IGhlbHAgYnV0IHN1cHBvcnQgSnVs aWVuJ3Mgdmlldy4gSGUgaXMgY29ycmVjdCB0aGF0IHNvbWUgcG9pbnRzDQo+PndlcmUgcmFpc2Vk IG5vdCBvbmNlLCBub3QgdHdpY2UsIGJ1dCBzZXZlcmFsIHRpbWVzLCBhbmQgaGF2ZSBzdGlsbCBu b3QNCj4+YmVlbiBhZGRyZXNzZWQuIA0KPj4NCj4+TXkgYW5zd2VyIHRvIHlvdXIgcXVlc3Rpb24g aXMNCj4+DQo+Pj4gUTogU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBJLUQgdGhlIGRvY3Vt ZW50Og0KPj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgd2hpY2gg d2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4+IHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IGluIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgdGhl IGZsb3cgbW9iaWxpdHkgZmVhdHVyZSBmb3IgUHJveHkNCj4+PiBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCj4+Pg0K Pj5ZZXMgIFsgICAgXQ0KPj5ObyAgICBbIFggXQ0KPj4NCj4+Q2hlZXJzLA0KPj5TdGVmYW5vIEZh Y2Npbg0KPj4NCj4+U3RhbmRhcmRzIE1hbmFnZXINCj4+UmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90aW9uIENvcnBv cmF0aW9uDQo+PjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+PkJ1aWxkaW5nIDYsIEJyYXpvcyBFYXN0 LCBTdGUuIDEwMA0KPj5JcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQQ0KPj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGlu IFBTVA0KPj4NCj4+T2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5MTAgMzQ1MQ0KPj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUx DQo+Pk1vYmlsZSA6ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4NDIyDQo+Pnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJy eS5jb20NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUg cHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+DQo+Pk9uIFdlZCwgQXVnIDEwLCAyMDExIGF0IDI6MTkgUE0s ICA8QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+Pj4gSGVsbG8sDQo+Pj4NCj4+ PiBBdCBJRVRGODEgdGhlIGNoYWlycyBtYWRlIGEgcHJvcG9zYWwgdG8gYWRvcHQgYXMgV0cgSS1E OiBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUNCj4+PklQdjYNCj4+PiBFeHRlbnNpb25zIHRvIFN1cHBvcnQgRmxvdyBN b2JpbGl0eQ0KPj4+IDxkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAzPiBB cyB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgZm9yDQo+Pj4gdGhlIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5pbmcg ZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmb3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYuDQo+Pj4gV2UgZ2F1Z2VkIHN1cHBv cnQgZm9yIGFuZCBhZ2FpbnN0IGFkb3B0aW5nIHRoaXMgSS1EIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEgV0cNCj4+ PiBtZWV0aW5nIHdpdGggdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyByZXN1bHQ6DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBJbiBmYXZvcjog MTgNCj4+PiBPcHBvc2VkOiBOb25lDQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBBcyBwZXIgcHJvY2VzcyB3ZSBhcmUgZm9s bG93aW5nIHVwIG9uIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Qgd2l0aCB0aGUgc2FtZQ0KPj4+IHF1ZXN0aW9u LiBQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCBieSBBdWcgMTh0aCwgMjAxMSB0byB0aGUgcXVlc3Rpb24gYmVsb3c6 DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBROiBTaG91bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIEktRCB0aGUgZG9jdW1l bnQ6DQo+Pj4gZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyB3aGljaCB3 aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQgYXMgdGhlDQo+Pj4gc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUg ZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQcm94eQ0KPj4+IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Pw0KPj4+DQo+ Pj4gWWVzICAgWyBdDQo+Pj4gTm8gICAgWyBdDQo+Pj4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+IC1DaGFpcnMNCj4+Pg0K Pj4+IElFVEY4MSBXRyBtaW51dGVzIGFyZSBwb3N0ZWQgYXQ6DQo+Pj4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IF9fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+Pj4gbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdA0KPj4+IG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21h aWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+Pj4NCj4+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+bmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj5uZXRleHRAaWV0 Zi5vcmcNCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9uZXRleHQNCj4+ DQo+Pi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPj5UaGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFueSBhdHRh Y2htZW50cykgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50aWFsDQo+PmluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBwcml2aWxl Z2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZQ0KPj5zb2xp Y2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1 dGUNCj4+bm9uLXB1YmxpYyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9u IGJ5IGFueW9uZSBvdGhlciB0aGFuDQo+PnRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGli aXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0KPj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3Is IHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj4+dGhp cyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBmcm9tIHlvdXIgc3lzdGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3Ry aWJ1dGlvbiwgb3INCj4+cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50 ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QNCj4+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVs Lg0KPg0KPg0KPi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPlRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgYW55 IGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwNCj5pbmZvcm1hdGlvbiwgcHJp dmlsZWdlZCBtYXRlcmlhbCAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFsIHByb3RlY3RlZCBieSB0aGUNCj5z b2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0 aXR1dGUNCj5ub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gYnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4NCj50aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHByb2hp Yml0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMNCj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3Is IHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj50aGlz IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiwgZGlzdHJp YnV0aW9uLCBvcg0KPnJlcHJvZHVjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVu ZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudHMgaXMgbm90DQo+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0K DQo= From sfaccin@rim.com Fri Aug 12 11:40:20 2011 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 4493E21F84E2 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:40:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 bs-Dy6a8go8P for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:40:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhs060cnc.rim.net (mhs060cnc.rim.net [208.65.73.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AFD821F84D7 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:40:19 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 0a41282f-b7cd4ae0000005d0-71-4e4573a94ecc Received: from XHT110CNC.rim.net (xht110cnc.rim.net [10.65.22.55]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mhs060cnc.rim.net (SBG) with SMTP id AF.8C.01488.9A3754E4; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:40:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from XCT102ADS.rim.net (10.67.111.43) by XHT110CNC.rim.net (10.65.22.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.159.2; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:40:56 -0400 Received: from XMB101ADS.rim.net ([fe80::cce5:67de:a150:3c3b]) by XCT102ADS.rim.net ([fe80::4806:2e1d:2b7c:cfdf%22]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:40:55 -0500 From: Stefano Faccin To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgIAAdZtw//+PPYCAAHYUQA== Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:40:54 +0000 Message-ID: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018627@XMB101ADS.rim.net> References: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018607@XMB101ADS.rim.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.70.110.253] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" content-transfer-encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrLKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXC5Shmrruy2NXP4OtRMYuW9d1sFtd+PmV3 YPJYsuQnk8fdW5eYApiiGhhtEvPy8ksSS1IVUlKLk22VfFLTE3MUAooyyxKTKxVcMouTcxIz c1OLlBQyU2yVTJQUCnISk1NzU/NKbJUSCwpS81KU7LgUMIANUFlmnkJqXnJ+SmZeuq2SZ7C/ roWFqaWuoZKdLhJI+Med0bB8N3PBDveKlu+/mRsYz7h2MXJwSAiYSHxqK+ti5AQyxSQu3FvP 1sXIxSEk0MMkcXnNVmYIZymjxPMjaxghnK2MEtNP9rODtLAJqEkseb6WGWSSiIC1xLy+JJAw s4C6xK35Z1lAbGGBHIlp6z6zgtgiArkS8989YoMoD5PY+d0SJMwioCqxYd1cJpAwr4CbxLMt 3iBhIYFiiXk/frKB2JwC5hJPDn8Cm8IoICux++x1JohN4hK3nsxngrhfQGLJnvPMELaoxMvH /1ghbEWJRZ3fGUHGMwtoSqzfpQ/Rqigxpfsh2B+8AoISJ2c+YYFYKyMx8fFilgmMErOQbJiF 0D0LSfcsJN0LGFlWMQrmZhQbmBkk5yXrFWXm6uWllmxiBKcTDf0djH17tQ4xCnAwKvHwvkh0 9RNiTSwrrsw9xCjBwawkwtv12sVPiDclsbIqtSg/vqg0J7X4EKMFMHgmMktxJ+cDU11eSbyx gQEKR0mcN1jawE9IIB2YuLJTUwtSi2BamTg4pRoYLfxPadhx7qpfujphacO8iITWmp/+b5Pi HkqeV3HXuvJn171rCRu86p7Maf3EqGnAuoLNreLYhrtuzxdeLrN+8D7eKzxkZvO7x36Pl91p rpDU81ltvFhuhrvvtOWpgn8+KU/0X/bW66P6olWaSQLenDy+LNqt/++k95xwF5eeHmFyc3cZ +8TJSizFGYmGWsxFxYkADTvxRkADAAA= Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:40:20 -0000 UmFqLA0KVGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgY2xhcmlmaWNhdGlvbi4gUGVyc29uYWxseSwgSSBiZWxp ZXZlIHdlIGFyZSBqdXN0IHBvc3Rwb25pbmcgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24uIElmIHNvbHV0aW9u cyBoYWQgaW5kZWVkIGJlZW4gcHJvcG9zZWQsIG9uZSB3b3VsZCBoYXZlIGhhZCBhIGNoYW5j ZSB0byBrZWVwIGFuIG9wZW4gbWluZCBpbiBjb25zaWRlcmluZyBpdC4gRm9yIHRoaXMgcmVh c29uLCBJIGhhdmUgbm8gY2hvaWNlIGJ1dCBtYWludGFpbmluZyBteSBpbmRpY2F0aW9uIGFz IGEgIk5PIi4NCkNoZWVycywNCg0KU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCg0KU3RhbmRhcmRzIE1hbmFn ZXINClJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbiANCjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERy aXZlIA0KQnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQpJcnZpbmcsIFRleGFz IDc1MDM5IFVTQSANCk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQoNCk9mZmljZTogKDk3MikgOTEw IDM0NTHCoCANCkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0NTENCk1vYmlsZSA6ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4NDIy DQp3d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tIA0KDQoNCg0K74GQIENvbnNpZGVy IHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQoNCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBN ZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IEJhc2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20gW21haWx0bzpC YXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tXSANClNlbnQ6IEZyaWRheSwgQXVndXN0IDEyLCAy MDExIDExOjM3IEFNDQpUbzogU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcN ClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogQWRvcHQgSS1EIGRyYWZ0 LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8N Cg0KDQpIaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KDQpUaGUgY2hhaXJzIHdpbGwgbW9uaXRvciB0aGUgZGlzY3Vz c2lvbiBjbG9zZWx5IGFuZCBhbnkgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb25zDQp0byB0aGUgaXNzdWVz IHRoYXQgYXJlIHJhaXNlZC4gVW5sZXNzIHdlKGNoYWlycyksIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2lu ZyB0aGUNCmlzc3VlLCBhcyB3ZWxsIGFzIHRoZSBXRyBtZW1iZXJzLCBhcmUgbm90IHNhdGlz ZmllZCB3aXRoIHRoZSByZXNvbHV0aW9uIHdlDQp3aWxsIG5vdCBwcm9ncmVzcyB0aGUgZG9j dW1lbnQuDQpUaGUgcG9pbnQgYWJvdXQgdGhlIHByb2Nlc3MgaGVyZSBpcyB0aGF0IGF0IHRo ZSBtb21lbnQgd2UgYXJlIHNwaW5uaW5nDQp3aGVlbHMgd2l0aG91dCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IGZv cndhcmQgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuIFdpdGggYSBtb3JlIGZvcm1hbCBhcHByb2FjaCB0bw0KdGhlIGRp c2N1c3Npb24gYW5kIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgdG9vbHMsIHdlIGhvcGUgdG8gYXZvaWQgZGlzY3Vz c2lvbnMgdGhhdCBhcmUNCmluIGFuIHVuZW5kaW5nIGxvb3AuIEkgZG8gaG9wZSB0aGF0IGZv bGtzIHdobyByYWlzZSBpc3N1ZXMgYXJlIGFsc28NCndpbGxpbmcgdG8gbGlzdGVuIHRvIHNv bHV0aW9ucyB3aXRoIGFuIG9wZW4gbWluZC4NCg0KLVJhag0KDQpPbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6Mjkg UE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+ UmFqLA0KPk1heSBJIGFzayBhIHF1ZXN0aW9uIHJlZ2FyZGluZyB0aGUgcHJvY2Vzcz8gWW91 IGNsYWltIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMgYXJlIG5vdA0KPnNob3cgc3RvcHBlcnMuIExldCdzIGFzc3Vt ZSB3ZSBwcm9jZWVkIGFuZCBoYW5kbGUgdGhlbSBpbiB0aGUgZGF0YQ0KPnRyYWNrZXIgdG8g ZGlzc2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2luZyB0aGVtLiBXaGF0IHRoZW4/ IEhvdw0KPndvdWxkIHlvdSBhY2hpZXZlIHByb2dyZXNzIHRoZW4/DQo+DQo+U3RlZmFubyBG YWNjaW4NCj4NCj5TdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KPlJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jw b3JhdGlvbg0KPjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVh c3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQo+SXJ2aW5nLCBUZXhhcyA3NTAzOSBVU0ENCj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVk IGluIFBTVA0KPg0KPk9mZmljZTogKDk3MikgOTEwIDM0NTENCj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYz NDUxDQo+TW9iaWxlIDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0MjINCj53d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNr YmVycnkuY29tDQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZv cmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+DQo+DQo+LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj5Gcm9t OiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tIFttYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5v a2lhLmNvbV0NCj5TZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEF1Z3VzdCAxMiwgMjAxMSAxMToyMCBBTQ0KPlRv OiBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSZTog W25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IEktRA0KPmRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1u ZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCj4NCj4NCj5IaSBT dGVmYW5vLA0KPg0KPkFzIEkgcmVwbGllZCB0byBKdWxpZW4sIEkgcmVhbGl6ZSB0aGF0IHdl IGhhdmUgZGlzY3Vzc2VkIHNldmVyYWwgYXNwZWN0cw0KPm9mIHRoZSBJLUQgbXVsdGlwbGUg dGltZXMuIEJ1dCBJIGRvIG5vdCBiZWxpZXZlIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBpc3N1ZXMgd2hpY2gNCj5j b3VsZCBiZSB0ZXJtZWQgYXMgImZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIiB0byB0aGUgcHJvdG9jb2wuDQo+SGVu Y2UgbXkgc3VnZ2VzdGlvbiB3b3VsZCBiZSBmb3IgZm9sa3MgdG8gcmFpc2UgdGhlc2UgaXNz dWVzIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlDQo+dHJhY2tlciBpbiBhIGZvcm1hbCBtYW5uZXIgdG8gZW5zdXJl IHRoYXQgdGhleSBhcmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgdG8gdGhlDQo+c2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9mIGFsbC4g UGxlYXNlIHRha2UgdGhlIHRpbWUgdG8gZnJhbWUgeW91ciBjb25jZXJucyBhbmQNCj5pc3N1 ZXMgb24gdGhlIE1MIGFuZCB0aHJvdWdoIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSB0cmFja2VyLg0KPg0KPi1SYWoN Cj4NCj5PbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6MDkgUE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2lu QHJpbS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPg0KPj5IZWxsbyBSYWosDQo+PkkgY2Fubm90IGhlbHAgYnV0 IHN1cHBvcnQgSnVsaWVuJ3Mgdmlldy4gSGUgaXMgY29ycmVjdCB0aGF0IHNvbWUgcG9pbnRz DQo+PndlcmUgcmFpc2VkIG5vdCBvbmNlLCBub3QgdHdpY2UsIGJ1dCBzZXZlcmFsIHRpbWVz LCBhbmQgaGF2ZSBzdGlsbCBub3QNCj4+YmVlbiBhZGRyZXNzZWQuIA0KPj4NCj4+TXkgYW5z d2VyIHRvIHlvdXIgcXVlc3Rpb24gaXMNCj4+DQo+Pj4gUTogU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFz IE5ldGV4dCBXRyBJLUQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Og0KPj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRl eHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4+IHN0 YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IGluIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgdGhlIGZsb3cgbW9iaWxpdHkgZmVhdHVyZSBm b3IgUHJveHkNCj4+PiBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCj4+Pg0KPj5ZZXMgIFsgICAgXQ0KPj5ObyAg ICBbIFggXQ0KPj4NCj4+Q2hlZXJzLA0KPj5TdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPj4NCj4+U3RhbmRh cmRzIE1hbmFnZXINCj4+UmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90aW9uIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uDQo+PjUwMDAg Uml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+PkJ1aWxkaW5nIDYsIEJyYXpvcyBFYXN0LCBTdGUuIDEwMA0K Pj5JcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQQ0KPj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KPj4N Cj4+T2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5MTAgMzQ1MQ0KPj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+Pk1v YmlsZSA6ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4NDIyDQo+Pnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJyeS5j b20NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUg cHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+DQo+Pk9uIFdlZCwgQXVnIDEwLCAyMDExIGF0IDI6MTkg UE0sICA8QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+Pj4gSGVsbG8sDQo+ Pj4NCj4+PiBBdCBJRVRGODEgdGhlIGNoYWlycyBtYWRlIGEgcHJvcG9zYWwgdG8gYWRvcHQg YXMgV0cgSS1EOiBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUNCj4+PklQdjYNCj4+PiBFeHRlbnNpb25zIHRvIFN1 cHBvcnQgRmxvdyBNb2JpbGl0eQ0KPj4+IDxkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2 Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAzPiBBcyB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgZm9yDQo+Pj4gdGhlIHNwZWNp ZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5pbmcgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmb3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYu DQo+Pj4gV2UgZ2F1Z2VkIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIGFuZCBhZ2FpbnN0IGFkb3B0aW5nIHRoaXMg SS1EIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEgV0cNCj4+PiBtZWV0aW5nIHdpdGggdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBy ZXN1bHQ6DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBJbiBmYXZvcjogMTgNCj4+PiBPcHBvc2VkOiBOb25lDQo+Pj4N Cj4+PiBBcyBwZXIgcHJvY2VzcyB3ZSBhcmUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIG9uIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5n IGxpc3Qgd2l0aCB0aGUgc2FtZQ0KPj4+IHF1ZXN0aW9uLiBQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCBieSBB dWcgMTh0aCwgMjAxMSB0byB0aGUgcXVlc3Rpb24gYmVsb3c6DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBROiBTaG91 bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIEktRCB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQ6DQo+Pj4gZHJhZnQt YmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQg YXMgdGhlDQo+Pj4gc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUgZmxvdyBtb2Jp bGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQcm94eQ0KPj4+IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Pw0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gWWVz ICAgWyBdDQo+Pj4gTm8gICAgWyBdDQo+Pj4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+IC1DaGFpcnMNCj4+Pg0KPj4+ IElFVEY4MSBXRyBtaW51dGVzIGFyZSBwb3N0ZWQgYXQ6DQo+Pj4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IF9fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+Pj4gbmV0ZXh0 IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4+IG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lmll dGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+Pj4NCj4+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+bmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlz dA0KPj5uZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9s aXN0aW5mby9uZXRleHQNCj4+DQo+Pi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPj5UaGlzIHRyYW5zbWlz c2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFueSBhdHRhY2htZW50cykgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50 aWFsDQo+PmluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0 ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZQ0KPj5zb2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFw cGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUNCj4+bm9uLXB1YmxpYyBpbmZv cm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGJ5IGFueW9uZSBvdGhlciB0 aGFuDQo+PnRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhh dmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0KPj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1l ZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj4+dGhpcyBpbmZvcm1h dGlvbiBmcm9tIHlvdXIgc3lzdGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlv biwgb3INCj4+cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5k ZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QNCj4+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVs Lg0KPg0KPg0KPi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPlRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRp bmcgYW55IGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwNCj5pbmZvcm1h dGlvbiwgcHJpdmlsZWdlZCBtYXRlcmlhbCAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFsIHByb3RlY3Rl ZCBieSB0aGUNCj5zb2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmls ZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUNCj5ub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNl IG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gYnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4NCj50aGUgaW50ZW5k ZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMN Cj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0 aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj50aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0 ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiwgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBvcg0KPnJlcHJvZHVjdGlv biBvZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudHMgaXMgbm90 DQo+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0KDQoNCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LQ0KVGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gKGluY2x1ZGluZyBhbnkgYXR0YWNobWVudHMpIG1heSBj b250YWluIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiwgcHJpdmlsZWdlZCBtYXRlcmlhbCAo aW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFsIHByb3RlY3RlZCBieSB0aGUgc29saWNpdG9yLWNsaWVudCBv ciBvdGhlciBhcHBsaWNhYmxlIHByaXZpbGVnZXMpLCBvciBjb25zdGl0dXRlIG5vbi1wdWJs aWMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24uIEFueSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBieSBhbnlvbmUg b3RoZXIgdGhhbiB0aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIElmIHlv dSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGluIGVycm9yLCBwbGVhc2UgaW1t ZWRpYXRlbHkgcmVwbHkgdG8gdGhlIHNlbmRlciBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gZnJvbSB5b3VyIHN5c3RlbS4gVXNlLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24s IG9yIHJlcHJvZHVjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJl Y2lwaWVudHMgaXMgbm90IGF1dGhvcml6ZWQgYW5kIG1heSBiZSB1bmxhd2Z1bC4NCg== From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 11:44:45 2011 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 60D3821F8538 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:44:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.704 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.704 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.105, 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 T5w42gzOLBqP for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4379721F8520 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CIiedK018240; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:45:20 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:45:06 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.58) by NOK-am1MHUB-02.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:45:05 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.58]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:45:05 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgIAAdZtw//+PPYCAAHYUQIAAAKIQ Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:45:04 +0000 Message-ID: <21E7D9BD69CC7241AAE00F4EA183B71908DD42@008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com> References: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018607@XMB101ADS.rim.net> <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018627@XMB101ADS.rim.net> In-Reply-To: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018627@XMB101ADS.rim.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-tituslabs-classifications-30: TLPropertyRoot=Nokia;Confidentiality=Company Confidential;Project=None; x-titus-version: 3.3.8.1 x-headerinfofordlp: None x-tituslabs-classificationhash-30: VgNFIFU9Hx+/nZJb9Kg7IqvcM73y3LVDmbqkH/ETKxooPluH9Uvr00wqzm0JpZotFbLA0Xb7G11BWd9EXn6gBHYcWN82l/mx9GaQL20q4w6C/HftjU5hZmLFHhrC5Xb4hm7TVFFcC2TmLEF6j4d8KrDjTfS4DpgZ6SHaJGRswf0dHK8tvpOIIFP6CI1kD07MZGFFqzhttkfqDFSTCADxmgSE+1+JJiQvWoSup4Ne8FzmH88pqmj54E+N75sCayGMwxzSYcfo1X4cAO1oLEEwXvXPgnnCo0b6jkEmt7cJQhr4/0LhAbI/d5Ii7W/fQ4S0 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.138] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 18:45:06.0391 (UTC) FILETIME=[F444CE70:01CC591F] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:44:45 -0000 SGkgU3RlZmFubywNCg0KSSByZWFsaXplIHRoYXQgd2UgaGF2ZSBoYWQgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMgb24g dGhlc2UgaXNzdWVzIG11bHRpcGxlIHRpbWVzLiBCdXQgYXMgeW91IGNhbiBzZWUgSSBjYW5ub3Qg cG9pbnQgdG8gc29tZSB0ZXh0IG9yIGVtYWlscyBvbiB0aGUgbGlzdCBhbmQgc2F5IGNvbmNsdXNp dmVseSB3aGV0aGVyIHRoZXkgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIHJlc29sdmVkIHRvIGV2ZXJ5b25lcyBzYXRpc2Zh Y3Rpb24gb3Igbm90LiBXZSB3aWxsIG5vIGRvdWJ0IGhhdmUgdGhlIHNhbWUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBh Z2Fpbi4gQnV0IEkgYW0gaG9waW5nIHRoYXQgd2l0aCB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSB0cmFja2VyIGFu ZCBjbGVhcmx5IGNhcHR1cmluZyB0aGUgaXNzdWUgYW5kIHRoZSBwcm9wb3NlZCByZXNvbHV0aW9u cywgd2UgY2FuIGF0IGxlYXN0IG1ha2UgYmV0dGVyIGRlY2lzaW9ucyBhbmQgZXZlbnR1YWxseSBw cm9ncmVzcy4NCg0KUGxlYXNlIGRvIHdyaXRlLXVwIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMgYW5kIGJyaW5nIHRoZW0g dG8gdGhlIGxpc3QgYW5kL29yIGlzc3VlIHRyYWNrZXIuDQoNClRoeC4NCi1SYWoNCg0KLS0tLS1P cmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IGV4dCBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2NpbiBbbWFpbHRvOnNm YWNjaW5AcmltLmNvbV0gDQpTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEF1Z3VzdCAxMiwgMjAxMSAxOjQxIFBNDQpU bzogUGF0aWwgQmFzYXZhcmFqIChOb2tpYS1DSUMvRGFsbGFzKQ0KQ2M6IG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9y Zw0KU3ViamVjdDogUkU6IFtuZXRleHRdIENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBBZG9wdCBJLUQgZHJhZnQt YmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyBhcyBOZXRleHQgV0cgZG9jPw0KDQpS YWosDQpUaGFua3MgZm9yIHRoZSBjbGFyaWZpY2F0aW9uLiBQZXJzb25hbGx5LCBJIGJlbGlldmUg d2UgYXJlIGp1c3QgcG9zdHBvbmluZyB0aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbi4gSWYgc29sdXRpb25zIGhhZCBp bmRlZWQgYmVlbiBwcm9wb3NlZCwgb25lIHdvdWxkIGhhdmUgaGFkIGEgY2hhbmNlIHRvIGtlZXAg YW4gb3BlbiBtaW5kIGluIGNvbnNpZGVyaW5nIGl0LiBGb3IgdGhpcyByZWFzb24sIEkgaGF2ZSBu byBjaG9pY2UgYnV0IG1haW50YWluaW5nIG15IGluZGljYXRpb24gYXMgYSAiTk8iLg0KQ2hlZXJz LA0KDQpTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KDQpTdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KUmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90 aW9uIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uIA0KNTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUgRHJpdmUgDQpCdWlsZGluZyA2LCBCcmF6 b3MgRWFzdCwgU3RlLiAxMDANCklydmluZywgVGV4YXMgNzUwMzkgVVNBIA0KTm90ZTogbG9jYXRl ZCBpbiBQU1QNCg0KT2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5MTAgMzQ1McKgIA0KSW50ZXJuYWw6IDgyMC42MzQ1 MQ0KTW9iaWxlIDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0MjINCnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJyeS5j b20gDQoNCg0KDQrvgZAgQ29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IGJlZm9yZSBwcmludGluZy4N Cg0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogQmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5v a2lhLmNvbSBbbWFpbHRvOkJhc2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb21dIA0KU2VudDogRnJpZGF5 LCBBdWd1c3QgMTIsIDIwMTEgMTE6MzcgQU0NClRvOiBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KQ2M6IG5ldGV4 dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtuZXRleHRdIENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBBZG9wdCBJ LUQgZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyBhcyBOZXRleHQgV0cg ZG9jPw0KDQoNCkhpIFN0ZWZhbm8sDQoNClRoZSBjaGFpcnMgd2lsbCBtb25pdG9yIHRoZSBkaXNj dXNzaW9uIGNsb3NlbHkgYW5kIGFueSBwcm9wb3NlZCBzb2x1dGlvbnMNCnRvIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMg dGhhdCBhcmUgcmFpc2VkLiBVbmxlc3Mgd2UoY2hhaXJzKSwgdGhlIHBlb3BsZSByYWlzaW5nIHRo ZQ0KaXNzdWUsIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMgdGhlIFdHIG1lbWJlcnMsIGFyZSBub3Qgc2F0aXNmaWVkIHdp dGggdGhlIHJlc29sdXRpb24gd2UNCndpbGwgbm90IHByb2dyZXNzIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudC4NClRo ZSBwb2ludCBhYm91dCB0aGUgcHJvY2VzcyBoZXJlIGlzIHRoYXQgYXQgdGhlIG1vbWVudCB3ZSBh cmUgc3Bpbm5pbmcNCndoZWVscyB3aXRob3V0IG1ha2luZyBhbnkgZm9yd2FyZCBwcm9ncmVzcy4g V2l0aCBhIG1vcmUgZm9ybWFsIGFwcHJvYWNoIHRvDQp0aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBhbmQgdXNlIG9m IHRoZSB0b29scywgd2UgaG9wZSB0byBhdm9pZCBkaXNjdXNzaW9ucyB0aGF0IGFyZQ0KaW4gYW4g dW5lbmRpbmcgbG9vcC4gSSBkbyBob3BlIHRoYXQgZm9sa3Mgd2hvIHJhaXNlIGlzc3VlcyBhcmUg YWxzbw0Kd2lsbGluZyB0byBsaXN0ZW4gdG8gc29sdXRpb25zIHdpdGggYW4gb3BlbiBtaW5kLg0K DQotUmFqDQoNCk9uIDgvMTIvMTEgMToyOSBQTSwgImV4dCBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2NpbiIgPHNmYWNj aW5AcmltLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5SYWosDQo+TWF5IEkgYXNrIGEgcXVlc3Rpb24gcmVnYXJk aW5nIHRoZSBwcm9jZXNzPyBZb3UgY2xhaW0gdGhlIGlzc3VlcyBhcmUgbm90DQo+c2hvdyBzdG9w cGVycy4gTGV0J3MgYXNzdW1lIHdlIHByb2NlZWQgYW5kIGhhbmRsZSB0aGVtIGluIHRoZSBkYXRh DQo+dHJhY2tlciB0byBkaXNzYXRpc2ZhY3Rpb24gb2YgdGhlIHBlb3BsZSByYWlzaW5nIHRoZW0u IFdoYXQgdGhlbj8gSG93DQo+d291bGQgeW91IGFjaGlldmUgcHJvZ3Jlc3MgdGhlbj8NCj4NCj5T dGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPg0KPlN0YW5kYXJkcyBNYW5hZ2VyDQo+UmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90aW9u IENvcnBvcmF0aW9uDQo+NTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUgRHJpdmUNCj5CdWlsZGluZyA2LCBCcmF6b3Mg RWFzdCwgU3RlLiAxMDANCj5JcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQQ0KPk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0ZWQg aW4gUFNUDQo+DQo+T2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5MTAgMzQ1MQ0KPkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0NTEN Cj5Nb2JpbGUgOiAoNTEwKSAyMzAgODQyMg0KPnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJyeS5j b20NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj7vgZAgQ29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IGJlZm9yZSBwcmludGlu Zy4NCj4NCj4NCj4tLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPkZyb206IEJhc2F2YXJhai5Q YXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20gW21haWx0bzpCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tXQ0KPlNlbnQ6 IEZyaWRheSwgQXVndXN0IDEyLCAyMDExIDExOjIwIEFNDQo+VG86IFN0ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQo+ Q2M6IG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPlN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2Fs bDogQWRvcHQgSS1EDQo+ZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyBh cyBOZXRleHQgV0cgZG9jPw0KPg0KPg0KPkhpIFN0ZWZhbm8sDQo+DQo+QXMgSSByZXBsaWVkIHRv IEp1bGllbiwgSSByZWFsaXplIHRoYXQgd2UgaGF2ZSBkaXNjdXNzZWQgc2V2ZXJhbCBhc3BlY3Rz DQo+b2YgdGhlIEktRCBtdWx0aXBsZSB0aW1lcy4gQnV0IEkgZG8gbm90IGJlbGlldmUgdGhlcmUg YXJlIGlzc3VlcyB3aGljaA0KPmNvdWxkIGJlIHRlcm1lZCBhcyAiZnVuZGFtZW50YWwiIHRvIHRo ZSBwcm90b2NvbC4NCj5IZW5jZSBteSBzdWdnZXN0aW9uIHdvdWxkIGJlIGZvciBmb2xrcyB0byBy YWlzZSB0aGVzZSBpc3N1ZXMgdGhyb3VnaCB0aGUNCj50cmFja2VyIGluIGEgZm9ybWFsIG1hbm5l ciB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCB0aGV5IGFyZSByZXNvbHZlZCB0byB0aGUNCj5zYXRpc2ZhY3Rpb24g b2YgYWxsLiBQbGVhc2UgdGFrZSB0aGUgdGltZSB0byBmcmFtZSB5b3VyIGNvbmNlcm5zIGFuZA0K Pmlzc3VlcyBvbiB0aGUgTUwgYW5kIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlIGlzc3VlIHRyYWNrZXIuDQo+DQo+LVJh ag0KPg0KPk9uIDgvMTIvMTEgMTowOSBQTSwgImV4dCBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2NpbiIgPHNmYWNjaW5A cmltLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+DQo+PkhlbGxvIFJhaiwNCj4+SSBjYW5ub3QgaGVscCBidXQgc3Vw cG9ydCBKdWxpZW4ncyB2aWV3LiBIZSBpcyBjb3JyZWN0IHRoYXQgc29tZSBwb2ludHMNCj4+d2Vy ZSByYWlzZWQgbm90IG9uY2UsIG5vdCB0d2ljZSwgYnV0IHNldmVyYWwgdGltZXMsIGFuZCBoYXZl IHN0aWxsIG5vdA0KPj5iZWVuIGFkZHJlc3NlZC4gDQo+Pg0KPj5NeSBhbnN3ZXIgdG8geW91ciBx dWVzdGlvbiBpcw0KPj4NCj4+PiBROiBTaG91bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIEktRCB0 aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQ6DQo+Pj4gZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0w MyB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQgYXMgdGhlDQo+Pj4gc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lm eWluZyB0aGUgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQcm94eQ0KPj4+IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2 Pw0KPj4+DQo+PlllcyAgWyAgICBdDQo+Pk5vICAgIFsgWCBdDQo+Pg0KPj5DaGVlcnMsDQo+PlN0 ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQo+Pg0KPj5TdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KPj5SZXNlYXJjaCBJbiBNb3Rp b24gQ29ycG9yYXRpb24NCj4+NTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUgRHJpdmUNCj4+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJh em9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQo+PklydmluZywgVGV4YXMgNzUwMzkgVVNBDQo+Pk5vdGU6IGxv Y2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQo+Pg0KPj5PZmZpY2U6ICg5NzIpIDkxMCAzNDUxDQo+PkludGVybmFsOiA4 MjAuNjM0NTENCj4+TW9iaWxlIDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0MjINCj4+d3d3LnJpbS5jb207IHd3dy5i bGFja2JlcnJ5LmNvbQ0KPj4NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj7vgZAgQ29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50 IGJlZm9yZSBwcmludGluZy4NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+T24gV2VkLCBBdWcgMTAsIDIwMTEgYXQg MjoxOSBQTSwgIDxCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCj4+PiBIZWxsbywN Cj4+Pg0KPj4+IEF0IElFVEY4MSB0aGUgY2hhaXJzIG1hZGUgYSBwcm9wb3NhbCB0byBhZG9wdCBh cyBXRyBJLUQ6IFByb3h5IE1vYmlsZQ0KPj4+SVB2Ng0KPj4+IEV4dGVuc2lvbnMgdG8gU3VwcG9y dCBGbG93IE1vYmlsaXR5DQo+Pj4gPGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dt b2ItMDM+IEFzIHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBmb3INCj4+PiB0aGUgc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbiBk ZWZpbmluZyBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZvciBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Ni4NCj4+PiBXZSBnYXVn ZWQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgYW5kIGFnYWluc3QgYWRvcHRpbmcgdGhpcyBJLUQgYXQgdGhlIElFVEY4 MSBXRw0KPj4+IG1lZXRpbmcgd2l0aCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHJlc3VsdDoNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IElu IGZhdm9yOiAxOA0KPj4+IE9wcG9zZWQ6IE5vbmUNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IEFzIHBlciBwcm9jZXNzIHdl IGFyZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXAgb24gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCB3aXRoIHRoZSBzYW1lDQo+Pj4g cXVlc3Rpb24uIFBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIGJ5IEF1ZyAxOHRoLCAyMDExIHRvIHRoZSBxdWVzdGlv biBiZWxvdzoNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IFE6IFNob3VsZCB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBOZXRleHQgV0cgSS1EIHRo ZSBkb2N1bWVudDoNCj4+PiBkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAz IHdoaWNoIHdpbGwgYmUgdXNlZCBhcyB0aGUNCj4+PiBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5 aW5nIHRoZSBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZlYXR1cmUgZm9yIFByb3h5DQo+Pj4gTW9iaWxlIElQdjY/ DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBZZXMgICBbIF0NCj4+PiBObyAgICBbIF0NCj4+Pg0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gLUNoYWly cw0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gSUVURjgxIFdHIG1pbnV0ZXMgYXJlIHBvc3RlZCBhdDoNCj4+PiBodHRwOi8v d3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0ZXMvbmV0ZXh0LnR4dA0KPj4+DQo+Pj4g X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+PiBuZXRl eHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+Pj4gbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQo+Pj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9uZXRleHQNCj4+Pg0KPj5fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPj5uZXRleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+Pm5l dGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25l dGV4dA0KPj4NCj4+LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+PlRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRpbmcg YW55IGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwNCj4+aW5mb3JtYXRpb24s IHByaXZpbGVnZWQgbWF0ZXJpYWwgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBtYXRlcmlhbCBwcm90ZWN0ZWQgYnkgdGhl DQo+PnNvbGljaXRvci1jbGllbnQgb3Igb3RoZXIgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBwcml2aWxlZ2VzKSwgb3Ig Y29uc3RpdHV0ZQ0KPj5ub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5m b3JtYXRpb24gYnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4NCj4+dGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCBp cyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkLiBJZiB5b3UgaGF2ZSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzDQo+PnRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBp biBlcnJvciwgcGxlYXNlIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBzZW5kZXIgYW5kIGRlbGV0 ZQ0KPj50aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlv biwgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBvcg0KPj5yZXByb2R1Y3Rpb24gb2YgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24g YnkgdW5pbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnRzIGlzIG5vdA0KPj5hdXRob3JpemVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUg dW5sYXdmdWwuDQo+DQo+DQo+LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+VGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gKGluY2x1 ZGluZyBhbnkgYXR0YWNobWVudHMpIG1heSBjb250YWluIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbA0KPmluZm9ybWF0 aW9uLCBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5 IHRoZQ0KPnNvbGljaXRvci1jbGllbnQgb3Igb3RoZXIgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBwcml2aWxlZ2VzKSwg b3IgY29uc3RpdHV0ZQ0KPm5vbi1wdWJsaWMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24uIEFueSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhpcyBp bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBieSBhbnlvbmUgb3RoZXIgdGhhbg0KPnRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQg aXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0KPnRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBp biBlcnJvciwgcGxlYXNlIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBzZW5kZXIgYW5kIGRlbGV0 ZQ0KPnRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZnJvbSB5b3VyIHN5c3RlbS4gVXNlLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9u LCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24sIG9yDQo+cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5 IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QNCj5hdXRob3JpemVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5s YXdmdWwuDQoNCg0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQpUaGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFu eSBhdHRhY2htZW50cykgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50aWFsIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBwcml2 aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZSBzb2xp Y2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1 dGUgbm9uLXB1YmxpYyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGJ5 IGFueW9uZSBvdGhlciB0aGFuIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4g SWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBp bW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlv biBmcm9tIHlvdXIgc3lzdGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiwgb3Ig cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50 cyBpcyBub3QgYXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0K From sfaccin@rim.com Fri Aug 12 11:56:28 2011 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 0E2AD11E8095 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:56:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 Q4pYZ3mw1f-f for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhs060cnc.rim.net (mhs060cnc.rim.net [208.65.73.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AA7F11E8090 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:56:24 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 0a41282f-b7cd4ae0000005d0-48-4e45776e5972 Received: from XHT104CNC.rim.net (xht104cnc.rim.net [10.65.22.52]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mhs060cnc.rim.net (SBG) with SMTP id 4A.AD.01488.E67754E4; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:56:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from XCT103ADS.rim.net (10.67.111.44) by XHT104CNC.rim.net (10.65.22.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.159.2; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:57:01 -0400 Received: from XMB101ADS.rim.net ([fe80::cce5:67de:a150:3c3b]) by XCT103ADS.rim.net ([fe80::c8f6:ae2e:c42b:3614%21]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:57:00 -0500 From: Stefano Faccin To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgIAAdZtw//+PPYCAAHYUQIAAAKIQgAADQPA= Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:56:59 +0000 Message-ID: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018647@XMB101ADS.rim.net> References: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018607@XMB101ADS.rim.net> <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018627@XMB101ADS.rim.net> <21E7D9BD69CC7241AAE00F4EA183B71908DD42@008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <21E7D9BD69CC7241AAE00F4EA183B71908DD42@008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com> Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.70.110.253] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" content-transfer-encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrAKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXC5ShmoptX7upnsL1HyKJlfTebxbWfT9kd mDyWLPnJ5HH31iWmAKaoBkabxLy8/JLEklSFlNTiZFsln9T0xByFgKLMssTkSgWXzOLknMTM 3NQiJYXMFFslEyWFgpzE5NTc1LwSW6XEgoLUvBQlOy4FDGADVJaZp5Cal5yfkpmXbqvkGeyv a2FhaqlrqGSniwQS/nFnfLj0i7VgU2rFtK2TmBoYnyR1MXJySAiYSFyc/4oZwhaTuHBvPVsX IxeHkEAPk8Sri1tYIJyljBJP726CcrYyShxdNo8dpIVNQE1iyfO1QO0cHCIC1hLz+sCmMguo S9yaf5YFxBYWyJGYtu4zK4gtIpArMf/dIzYIO0nibscNsM0sAqoSB373g43hFXCTOHxGDWLV H0aJAw0bGEFqOAXCJDrnzwVbyyggK7H77HUmiF3iEreezGeC+EBAYsme81DfiEq8fPyPFcJW lFjU+Z0RZD6zgKbE+l36EK2KElO6H4KN5BUQlDg58wnYyUICMhITHy9mmcAoMQvJhlkI3bOQ dM9C0r2AkWUVo2BuRrGBmUFyXrJeUWauXl5qySZGcFLR0N/B2LdX6xCjAAejEg/vi0RXPyHW xLLiytxDjBIczEoivF2vXfyEeFMSK6tSi/Lji0pzUosPMVoAw2cisxR3cj4w4eWVxBsbGKBw lMR5g6UN/IQE0oHpKzs1tSC1CKaViYNTqoGxRmnLX85V69Plt3Rc/ndfRNG+roBtmdrPw0cW xty5p8X1jnfZxyNn5Rncsr683JrNON3HuYb7eNQfsW9BKa8DL7Hkp8dx77gl6cFXwzS1I21r tvF8A/bd4m9n6EiWaL/dznEhvVRmeVZdmObKwjc6fXotzy0FxWTi5tiu7Lle4WNvt4JhloIS S3FGoqEWc1FxIgBBXbMEQwMAAA== Cc: "netext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 18:56:28 -0000 UmFqLA0KQXQgdGhpcyBwb2ludCBJIGhhdmUgbm8gdHJ1c3Qgd2hhdHNvZXZlciB0aGF0IHRo ZSBpc3N1ZXMgdGhhdCB3ZXJlIHJhaXNlZCB3aWxsIGJlIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgYXQgYWxsLiBU aGV5IGhhdmUgbm90IGJlZW4gc28gZmFyLCBzbyBJIGV4cGVjdCB0aGUgc2FtZSB3aWxsIGhh cHBlbiBhZ2Fpbi4gRXZlbiBpZiBpbiB0aGUgdHJhY2tlciBtZWNoYW5pc20sIEknZCBsaWtl IHRvIGtub3cgd2hhdCAidG8gZXZlcnlib2R5IHNhdGlzZmFjdGlvbiIgbWVhbnMuIEl0IHdp bGwgb25jZSBhZ2FpbiBiZSB0b3RhbGx5IHN1YmplY3RpdmUsIHdoaWNoIHRoZW4gZGVmaWVz IHRoZSB3aG9sZSBwcm9jZXNzLiBJIHRoaW5rIHRvbyBtYW55IHBlb3BsZSBoYWQgdG8gc3Bl bmQgd2F5IHRvbyBtdWNoIHRpbWUgb24gdGhpcyBqdXN0IHRvIGVuZCB1cCBleGFjdGx5IHdo ZXJlIHdlIHdlcmUgd2l0aCBubyBhbnN3ZXJzIHdoYXRzb2V2ZXIgKHBlcmhhcHMgYmVjYXVz ZSB0aGVyZSBhcmUgbm9uZSwgaWYgb25lIGV4aXN0ZWQgSSBndWVzcyB0aGVyZSB3b3VsZCBo YXZlIGJlZW4gdGltZSB0byBzaG93IGl0PykuIEFnYWluLCBJIG1haW50YWluIGEgW05PXS4g VG9vIGJhZCB3ZSBuZWVkIHRvIGhhbmRsZSB0aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiB0aGlzIHdheS4gDQpD aGVlcnMsDQoNClN0ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQoNClN0YW5kYXJkcyBNYW5hZ2VyDQpSZXNlYXJj aCBJbiBNb3Rpb24gQ29ycG9yYXRpb24gDQo1MDAwIFJpdmVyc2lkZSBEcml2ZSANCkJ1aWxk aW5nIDYsIEJyYXpvcyBFYXN0LCBTdGUuIDEwMA0KSXJ2aW5nLCBUZXhhcyA3NTAzOSBVU0Eg DQpOb3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KDQpPZmZpY2U6ICg5NzIpIDkxMCAzNDUxwqAgDQpJ bnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQpNb2JpbGUgOiAoNTEwKSAyMzAgODQyMg0Kd3d3LnJpbS5j b207IHd3dy5ibGFja2JlcnJ5LmNvbSANCg0KDQoNCu+BkCBDb25zaWRlciB0aGUgZW52aXJv bm1lbnQgYmVmb3JlIHByaW50aW5nLg0KDQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0t DQpGcm9tOiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tIFttYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBh dGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbV0gDQpTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEF1Z3VzdCAxMiwgMjAxMSAxMTo0NSBB TQ0KVG86IFN0ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQpDYzogbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBS RTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IEktRCBkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3Mt bmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAzIGFzIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBkb2M/DQoNCkhpIFN0ZWZh bm8sDQoNCkkgcmVhbGl6ZSB0aGF0IHdlIGhhdmUgaGFkIGRpc2N1c3Npb25zIG9uIHRoZXNl IGlzc3VlcyBtdWx0aXBsZSB0aW1lcy4gQnV0IGFzIHlvdSBjYW4gc2VlIEkgY2Fubm90IHBv aW50IHRvIHNvbWUgdGV4dCBvciBlbWFpbHMgb24gdGhlIGxpc3QgYW5kIHNheSBjb25jbHVz aXZlbHkgd2hldGhlciB0aGV5IGhhdmUgYmVlbiByZXNvbHZlZCB0byBldmVyeW9uZXMgc2F0 aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9yIG5vdC4gV2Ugd2lsbCBubyBkb3VidCBoYXZlIHRoZSBzYW1lIGRpc2N1 c3Npb24gYWdhaW4uIEJ1dCBJIGFtIGhvcGluZyB0aGF0IHdpdGggdGhlIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUg dHJhY2tlciBhbmQgY2xlYXJseSBjYXB0dXJpbmcgdGhlIGlzc3VlIGFuZCB0aGUgcHJvcG9z ZWQgcmVzb2x1dGlvbnMsIHdlIGNhbiBhdCBsZWFzdCBtYWtlIGJldHRlciBkZWNpc2lvbnMg YW5kIGV2ZW50dWFsbHkgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuDQoNClBsZWFzZSBkbyB3cml0ZS11cCB0aGUgaXNz dWVzIGFuZCBicmluZyB0aGVtIHRvIHRoZSBsaXN0IGFuZC9vciBpc3N1ZSB0cmFja2VyLg0K DQpUaHguDQotUmFqDQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpGcm9tOiBleHQg U3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4gW21haWx0bzpzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb21dIA0KU2VudDogRnJpZGF5 LCBBdWd1c3QgMTIsIDIwMTEgMTo0MSBQTQ0KVG86IFBhdGlsIEJhc2F2YXJhaiAoTm9raWEt Q0lDL0RhbGxhcykNCkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJFOiBbbmV0ZXh0 XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogQWRvcHQgSS1EIGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1p cHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCg0KUmFqLA0KVGhhbmtzIGZvciB0 aGUgY2xhcmlmaWNhdGlvbi4gUGVyc29uYWxseSwgSSBiZWxpZXZlIHdlIGFyZSBqdXN0IHBv c3Rwb25pbmcgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24uIElmIHNvbHV0aW9ucyBoYWQgaW5kZWVkIGJlZW4g cHJvcG9zZWQsIG9uZSB3b3VsZCBoYXZlIGhhZCBhIGNoYW5jZSB0byBrZWVwIGFuIG9wZW4g bWluZCBpbiBjb25zaWRlcmluZyBpdC4gRm9yIHRoaXMgcmVhc29uLCBJIGhhdmUgbm8gY2hv aWNlIGJ1dCBtYWludGFpbmluZyBteSBpbmRpY2F0aW9uIGFzIGEgIk5PIi4NCkNoZWVycywN Cg0KU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCg0KU3RhbmRhcmRzIE1hbmFnZXINClJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1v dGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbiANCjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlIA0KQnVpbGRpbmcgNiwg QnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQpJcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1MDM5IFVTQSANCk5vdGU6 IGxvY2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQoNCk9mZmljZTogKDk3MikgOTEwIDM0NTHCoCANCkludGVybmFs OiA4MjAuNjM0NTENCk1vYmlsZSA6ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4NDIyDQp3d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3 LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tIA0KDQoNCg0K74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBi ZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQoNCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206 IEJhc2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20gW21haWx0bzpCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9r aWEuY29tXSANClNlbnQ6IEZyaWRheSwgQXVndXN0IDEyLCAyMDExIDExOjM3IEFNDQpUbzog U3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbbmV0 ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogQWRvcHQgSS1EIGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQt cG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCg0KDQpIaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0K DQpUaGUgY2hhaXJzIHdpbGwgbW9uaXRvciB0aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBjbG9zZWx5IGFuZCBh bnkgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb25zDQp0byB0aGUgaXNzdWVzIHRoYXQgYXJlIHJhaXNlZC4g VW5sZXNzIHdlKGNoYWlycyksIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2luZyB0aGUNCmlzc3VlLCBhcyB3 ZWxsIGFzIHRoZSBXRyBtZW1iZXJzLCBhcmUgbm90IHNhdGlzZmllZCB3aXRoIHRoZSByZXNv bHV0aW9uIHdlDQp3aWxsIG5vdCBwcm9ncmVzcyB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQuDQpUaGUgcG9pbnQg YWJvdXQgdGhlIHByb2Nlc3MgaGVyZSBpcyB0aGF0IGF0IHRoZSBtb21lbnQgd2UgYXJlIHNw aW5uaW5nDQp3aGVlbHMgd2l0aG91dCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IGZvcndhcmQgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuIFdp dGggYSBtb3JlIGZvcm1hbCBhcHByb2FjaCB0bw0KdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYW5kIHVzZSBv ZiB0aGUgdG9vbHMsIHdlIGhvcGUgdG8gYXZvaWQgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMgdGhhdCBhcmUNCmlu IGFuIHVuZW5kaW5nIGxvb3AuIEkgZG8gaG9wZSB0aGF0IGZvbGtzIHdobyByYWlzZSBpc3N1 ZXMgYXJlIGFsc28NCndpbGxpbmcgdG8gbGlzdGVuIHRvIHNvbHV0aW9ucyB3aXRoIGFuIG9w ZW4gbWluZC4NCg0KLVJhag0KDQpPbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6MjkgUE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBG YWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+UmFqLA0KPk1heSBJIGFzayBh IHF1ZXN0aW9uIHJlZ2FyZGluZyB0aGUgcHJvY2Vzcz8gWW91IGNsYWltIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMg YXJlIG5vdA0KPnNob3cgc3RvcHBlcnMuIExldCdzIGFzc3VtZSB3ZSBwcm9jZWVkIGFuZCBo YW5kbGUgdGhlbSBpbiB0aGUgZGF0YQ0KPnRyYWNrZXIgdG8gZGlzc2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9m IHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2luZyB0aGVtLiBXaGF0IHRoZW4/IEhvdw0KPndvdWxkIHlvdSBh Y2hpZXZlIHByb2dyZXNzIHRoZW4/DQo+DQo+U3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCj4NCj5TdGFuZGFy ZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KPlJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbg0KPjUwMDAgUml2 ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQo+SXJ2 aW5nLCBUZXhhcyA3NTAzOSBVU0ENCj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KPg0KPk9mZmlj ZTogKDk3MikgOTEwIDM0NTENCj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+TW9iaWxlIDogKDUx MCkgMjMwIDg0MjINCj53d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tDQo+DQo+DQo+ DQo+74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+DQo+ DQo+LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj5Gcm9tOiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxA bm9raWEuY29tIFttYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbV0NCj5TZW50OiBG cmlkYXksIEF1Z3VzdCAxMiwgMjAxMSAxMToyMCBBTQ0KPlRvOiBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0K PkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3Vz IGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IEktRA0KPmRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dt b2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCj4NCj4NCj5IaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KPg0KPkFzIEkg cmVwbGllZCB0byBKdWxpZW4sIEkgcmVhbGl6ZSB0aGF0IHdlIGhhdmUgZGlzY3Vzc2VkIHNl dmVyYWwgYXNwZWN0cw0KPm9mIHRoZSBJLUQgbXVsdGlwbGUgdGltZXMuIEJ1dCBJIGRvIG5v dCBiZWxpZXZlIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBpc3N1ZXMgd2hpY2gNCj5jb3VsZCBiZSB0ZXJtZWQgYXMg ImZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIiB0byB0aGUgcHJvdG9jb2wuDQo+SGVuY2UgbXkgc3VnZ2VzdGlvbiB3 b3VsZCBiZSBmb3IgZm9sa3MgdG8gcmFpc2UgdGhlc2UgaXNzdWVzIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlDQo+ dHJhY2tlciBpbiBhIGZvcm1hbCBtYW5uZXIgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgdGhleSBhcmUgcmVz b2x2ZWQgdG8gdGhlDQo+c2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9mIGFsbC4gUGxlYXNlIHRha2UgdGhlIHRp bWUgdG8gZnJhbWUgeW91ciBjb25jZXJucyBhbmQNCj5pc3N1ZXMgb24gdGhlIE1MIGFuZCB0 aHJvdWdoIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSB0cmFja2VyLg0KPg0KPi1SYWoNCj4NCj5PbiA4LzEyLzExIDE6 MDkgUE0sICJleHQgU3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4iIDxzZmFjY2luQHJpbS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0K Pg0KPj5IZWxsbyBSYWosDQo+PkkgY2Fubm90IGhlbHAgYnV0IHN1cHBvcnQgSnVsaWVuJ3Mg dmlldy4gSGUgaXMgY29ycmVjdCB0aGF0IHNvbWUgcG9pbnRzDQo+PndlcmUgcmFpc2VkIG5v dCBvbmNlLCBub3QgdHdpY2UsIGJ1dCBzZXZlcmFsIHRpbWVzLCBhbmQgaGF2ZSBzdGlsbCBu b3QNCj4+YmVlbiBhZGRyZXNzZWQuIA0KPj4NCj4+TXkgYW5zd2VyIHRvIHlvdXIgcXVlc3Rp b24gaXMNCj4+DQo+Pj4gUTogU2hvdWxkIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBJLUQgdGhl IGRvY3VtZW50Og0KPj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2It MDMgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4+IHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IGluIHNw ZWNpZnlpbmcgdGhlIGZsb3cgbW9iaWxpdHkgZmVhdHVyZSBmb3IgUHJveHkNCj4+PiBNb2Jp bGUgSVB2Nj8NCj4+Pg0KPj5ZZXMgIFsgICAgXQ0KPj5ObyAgICBbIFggXQ0KPj4NCj4+Q2hl ZXJzLA0KPj5TdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPj4NCj4+U3RhbmRhcmRzIE1hbmFnZXINCj4+UmVz ZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90aW9uIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uDQo+PjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+ PkJ1aWxkaW5nIDYsIEJyYXpvcyBFYXN0LCBTdGUuIDEwMA0KPj5JcnZpbmcsIFRleGFzIDc1 MDM5IFVTQQ0KPj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KPj4NCj4+T2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5 MTAgMzQ1MQ0KPj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+Pk1vYmlsZSA6ICg1MTApIDIzMCA4 NDIyDQo+Pnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJyeS5jb20NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+ 74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+Pg0KPj4N Cj4+DQo+Pk9uIFdlZCwgQXVnIDEwLCAyMDExIGF0IDI6MTkgUE0sICA8QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBh dGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+Pj4gSGVsbG8sDQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBBdCBJRVRGODEg dGhlIGNoYWlycyBtYWRlIGEgcHJvcG9zYWwgdG8gYWRvcHQgYXMgV0cgSS1EOiBQcm94eSBN b2JpbGUNCj4+PklQdjYNCj4+PiBFeHRlbnNpb25zIHRvIFN1cHBvcnQgRmxvdyBNb2JpbGl0 eQ0KPj4+IDxkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1mbG93bW9iLTAzPiBBcyB0 aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgZm9yDQo+Pj4gdGhlIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZGVmaW5pbmcg ZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmb3IgUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYuDQo+Pj4gV2UgZ2F1Z2VkIHN1 cHBvcnQgZm9yIGFuZCBhZ2FpbnN0IGFkb3B0aW5nIHRoaXMgSS1EIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEg V0cNCj4+PiBtZWV0aW5nIHdpdGggdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyByZXN1bHQ6DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBJ biBmYXZvcjogMTgNCj4+PiBPcHBvc2VkOiBOb25lDQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBBcyBwZXIgcHJvY2Vz cyB3ZSBhcmUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIG9uIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Qgd2l0aCB0aGUgc2Ft ZQ0KPj4+IHF1ZXN0aW9uLiBQbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCBieSBBdWcgMTh0aCwgMjAxMSB0byB0 aGUgcXVlc3Rpb24gYmVsb3c6DQo+Pj4NCj4+PiBROiBTaG91bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgTmV0 ZXh0IFdHIEktRCB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQ6DQo+Pj4gZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1w bWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIHVzZWQgYXMgdGhlDQo+Pj4gc3RhcnRp bmcgcG9pbnQgaW4gc3BlY2lmeWluZyB0aGUgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBmZWF0dXJlIGZvciBQ cm94eQ0KPj4+IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Pw0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gWWVzICAgWyBdDQo+Pj4gTm8gICAg WyBdDQo+Pj4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+IC1DaGFpcnMNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IElFVEY4MSBXRyBtaW51dGVz IGFyZSBwb3N0ZWQgYXQ6DQo+Pj4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84 MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQNCj4+Pg0KPj4+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+Pj4gbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4+ IG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlz dGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+Pj4NCj4+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+bmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj5uZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5v cmcNCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9uZXRleHQNCj4+ DQo+Pi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPj5UaGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFu eSBhdHRhY2htZW50cykgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50aWFsDQo+PmluZm9ybWF0aW9u LCBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5 IHRoZQ0KPj5zb2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdl cyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUNCj4+bm9uLXB1YmxpYyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBv ZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGJ5IGFueW9uZSBvdGhlciB0aGFuDQo+PnRoZSBpbnRlbmRl ZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0K Pj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0 aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj4+dGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBmcm9tIHlvdXIgc3lz dGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiwgb3INCj4+cmVwcm9kdWN0 aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBu b3QNCj4+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0KPg0KPg0KPi0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLQ0KPlRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgYW55IGF0dGFjaG1lbnRz KSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwNCj5pbmZvcm1hdGlvbiwgcHJpdmlsZWdlZCBt YXRlcmlhbCAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFsIHByb3RlY3RlZCBieSB0aGUNCj5zb2xpY2l0 b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1 dGUNCj5ub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gYnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4NCj50aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHBy b2hpYml0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMNCj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4g ZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxl dGUNCj50aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5h dGlvbiwgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBvcg0KPnJlcHJvZHVjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlz c2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudHMgaXMgbm90DQo+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQg bWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0KDQoNCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KVGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Np b24gKGluY2x1ZGluZyBhbnkgYXR0YWNobWVudHMpIG1heSBjb250YWluIGNvbmZpZGVudGlh bCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiwgcHJpdmlsZWdlZCBtYXRlcmlhbCAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFs IHByb3RlY3RlZCBieSB0aGUgc29saWNpdG9yLWNsaWVudCBvciBvdGhlciBhcHBsaWNhYmxl IHByaXZpbGVnZXMpLCBvciBjb25zdGl0dXRlIG5vbi1wdWJsaWMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24uIEFu eSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBieSBhbnlvbmUgb3RoZXIgdGhhbiB0aGUgaW50 ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRo aXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGluIGVycm9yLCBwbGVhc2UgaW1tZWRpYXRlbHkgcmVwbHkgdG8g dGhlIHNlbmRlciBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZnJvbSB5b3VyIHN5c3Rl bS4gVXNlLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24sIG9yIHJlcHJvZHVjdGlvbiBv ZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudHMgaXMgbm90IGF1 dGhvcml6ZWQgYW5kIG1heSBiZSB1bmxhd2Z1bC4NCg0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQpUaGlz IHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFueSBhdHRhY2htZW50cykgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4g Y29uZmlkZW50aWFsIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRp bmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZSBzb2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVy IGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUgbm9uLXB1YmxpYyBpbmZv cm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGJ5IGFueW9uZSBvdGhlciB0 aGFuIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUg cmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVs eSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBmcm9t IHlvdXIgc3lzdGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiwgb3IgcmVw cm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50 cyBpcyBub3QgYXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0K From julien.ietf@gmail.com Fri Aug 12 12:03:11 2011 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 6070211E809E for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:11 -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 cuyEf485iCER for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D6C11E8090 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so2704312wyg.31 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Or0ldf98FSYLNncFppHdC8jBvtwWsuoBsGR9l3mwH5c=; b=afQLi7vE5SM+TzGp+EpPzbruVzeFuTwTu6rCNuSEkDsEbq7fkMZ1pX/FFQi9eJth2z tESVkIvxasFbo5eBsCuDhZaPiV8JTX200gd09HoBTPgej7EwIpsA4Fwtcde8jyF7rhjH WChtTpF3pDuUoGgM8NL4dZKfwU3K2+s53qp6Y= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.11.137 with SMTP id t9mr1218677wbt.9.1313175827858; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.59.147 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:03:47 -0700 Message-ID: From: Julien Laganier To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 19:03:11 -0000 Raj, On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:13 AM, wrote: > > Hi Julien, > > On 8/12/11 12:55 PM, "ext Julien Laganier" wrote: > >>Hello Raj, >> >>While parts of this document are reasonable extensions to the PMIPv6 >>protocol, I have indicated repeatedly that I had a fundamental issue >>with the other part of the document that lets the LMA unilaterally >>decides to move flows. > > I don=B9t believe there is this fundamental issue that (you mention) is a > show-stopper in the case of flow mobility for PMIP6. My recollection from > previous discussions is that the LMA makes the decision to move a flow > based on some policy which is either locally configured or obtains from a= n > external entity. You may disagree with that approach. We can discuss this > issue further and ensure that it is either fairly resolved through the > tracker. > My suggestion would be for you to write up this issue and upload it to th= e > tracker and we will resolve it to the satisfaction of the WG members. Are you assessing the issue I described as not fundamental in your function of WG chair? The "approach" of resolving the issue by making it someone else problems does not address the fundamental issue that if one of the MN's radio access isn' t working properly, having the LMA unilaterraly direct a flow there will harm the MN ability to communicate without a mean for the MN to recover. So yes I disagree. I have written the issue down on this mailing list many, many times, I have discussed it many, many times, and the issue was never addressed adequately. Your denial that this this fundamental also does not hint at how further discussions can possibly resolve that issue. And keeping this controversial feature in the draft ensure that the basis on which we discuss is un-agreeable to a number of people in this group, and is fundamentally broken. Not a very good starting point IMHO. --julien From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 12:05:35 2011 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 C051D11E80A3 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:05:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.100, 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 UlomszRxS08G for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5425E11E8090 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CJ6Am3003875; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:06:11 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:06:09 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.59) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:06:09 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.59]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:06:09 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUAgAAD04D//68fgIAAdZtw//+PPYCAAHYUQIAAAKIQgAADQPD//44yAA== Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:06:09 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED0018647@XMB101ADS.rim.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <17100339A787EE42B74B992D8D44E0F7@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 19:06:09.0826 (UTC) FILETIME=[E555B020:01CC5922] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 19:05:35 -0000 DQpIaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KDQpJIGNhbm5vdCBjaGFuZ2UgaG93IHlvdSBmZWVsIGFib3V0IHRoZSBw cm9wb3NlZCBwcm9jZXNzIGFuZCBwcm9wb3NhbCBvcg0KeW91ciAiTm8iIHJlc3BvbnNlLg0KV2hh dCBJIG1lYW4gYnkgInRvIGV2ZXJ5Ym9keSdzIHNhdGlzZmFjdGlvbiIgaXMgdGhhdCB0aGVyZSBp cyBtb3JlIHRoYW4NCnJvdWdoIGNvbnNlbnN1cy4uLiBUaGF0IGlzIHdoYXQgdGhlIElFVEYgcHJv Y2VzcyBjYWxscyBmb3IuIEkgZG8gbm90DQpiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgd2Ugd2lsbCBoYXZlIHVuYW5p bW91cyBjb25zZW50IG9uIGFsbCBpc3N1ZXMuIE9uIHRoaXMgdG9waWMgSQ0Kd2lsbCBtb2RlcmF0 ZSAoYXMgdGhlIHNvbGUgY2hhaXIpIHRvIGVuc3VyZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMgYXJlIGRlYWx0 IHdpdGgNCmFuZCBwcm9wb3NlZCByZXNvbHV0aW9ucyBhcmUgc2F0aXNmYWN0b3J5LiBJdCBtaWdo dCBub3QgYmUgc3VmZmljaWVudCB0bw0Kc2F0aXNmeSBldmVyeW9uZS4gQnV0IHdlIHdpbGwgbWFr ZSBhbiBhdHRlbXB0LiBUaGF04oCZcyBhbGwgSSBjYW4gdHJ5IHRvDQptYWtlIHByb2dyZXNzIG9u IHRoaXMgdG9waWMuDQoNCi1SYWoNCg0KT24gOC8xMi8xMSAxOjU2IFBNLCAiZXh0IFN0ZWZhbm8g RmFjY2luIiA8c2ZhY2NpbkByaW0uY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KPlJhaiwNCj5BdCB0aGlzIHBvaW50 IEkgaGF2ZSBubyB0cnVzdCB3aGF0c29ldmVyIHRoYXQgdGhlIGlzc3VlcyB0aGF0IHdlcmUgcmFp c2VkDQo+d2lsbCBiZSBjb25zaWRlcmVkIGF0IGFsbC4gVGhleSBoYXZlIG5vdCBiZWVuIHNvIGZh ciwgc28gSSBleHBlY3QgdGhlDQo+c2FtZSB3aWxsIGhhcHBlbiBhZ2Fpbi4gRXZlbiBpZiBpbiB0 aGUgdHJhY2tlciBtZWNoYW5pc20sIEknZCBsaWtlIHRvDQo+a25vdyB3aGF0ICJ0byBldmVyeWJv ZHkgc2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIiBtZWFucy4gSXQgd2lsbCBvbmNlIGFnYWluIGJlDQo+dG90YWxseSBz dWJqZWN0aXZlLCB3aGljaCB0aGVuIGRlZmllcyB0aGUgd2hvbGUgcHJvY2Vzcy4gSSB0aGluayB0 b28gbWFueQ0KPnBlb3BsZSBoYWQgdG8gc3BlbmQgd2F5IHRvbyBtdWNoIHRpbWUgb24gdGhpcyBq dXN0IHRvIGVuZCB1cCBleGFjdGx5DQo+d2hlcmUgd2Ugd2VyZSB3aXRoIG5vIGFuc3dlcnMgd2hh dHNvZXZlciAocGVyaGFwcyBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBub25lLA0KPmlmIG9uZSBleGlzdGVk IEkgZ3Vlc3MgdGhlcmUgd291bGQgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIHRpbWUgdG8gc2hvdyBpdD8pLiBBZ2Fpbiwg SQ0KPm1haW50YWluIGEgW05PXS4gVG9vIGJhZCB3ZSBuZWVkIHRvIGhhbmRsZSB0aGUgZGlzY3Vz c2lvbiB0aGlzIHdheS4NCj5DaGVlcnMsDQo+DQo+U3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4NCj4NCj5TdGFuZGFy ZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KPlJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbg0KPjUwMDAgUml2ZXJz aWRlIERyaXZlDQo+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQo+SXJ2aW5nLCBU ZXhhcyA3NTAzOSBVU0ENCj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KPg0KPk9mZmljZTogKDk3Mikg OTEwIDM0NTENCj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+TW9iaWxlIDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0MjIN Cj53d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tDQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+74GQIENvbnNpZGVy IHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+DQo+DQo+LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBN ZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj5Gcm9tOiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tIFttYWlsdG86QmFz YXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbV0NCj5TZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEF1Z3VzdCAxMiwgMjAxMSAx MTo0NSBBTQ0KPlRvOiBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5TdWJq ZWN0OiBSRTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IEktRA0KPmRyYWZ0LWJlcm5h cmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCj4NCj5IaSBT dGVmYW5vLA0KPg0KPkkgcmVhbGl6ZSB0aGF0IHdlIGhhdmUgaGFkIGRpc2N1c3Npb25zIG9uIHRo ZXNlIGlzc3VlcyBtdWx0aXBsZSB0aW1lcy4NCj5CdXQgYXMgeW91IGNhbiBzZWUgSSBjYW5ub3Qg cG9pbnQgdG8gc29tZSB0ZXh0IG9yIGVtYWlscyBvbiB0aGUgbGlzdCBhbmQNCj5zYXkgY29uY2x1 c2l2ZWx5IHdoZXRoZXIgdGhleSBoYXZlIGJlZW4gcmVzb2x2ZWQgdG8gZXZlcnlvbmVzDQo+c2F0 aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9yIG5vdC4gV2Ugd2lsbCBubyBkb3VidCBoYXZlIHRoZSBzYW1lIGRpc2N1c3Np b24gYWdhaW4uIEJ1dA0KPkkgYW0gaG9waW5nIHRoYXQgd2l0aCB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSB0cmFj a2VyIGFuZCBjbGVhcmx5IGNhcHR1cmluZyB0aGUNCj5pc3N1ZSBhbmQgdGhlIHByb3Bvc2VkIHJl c29sdXRpb25zLCB3ZSBjYW4gYXQgbGVhc3QgbWFrZSBiZXR0ZXIgZGVjaXNpb25zDQo+YW5kIGV2 ZW50dWFsbHkgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuDQo+DQo+UGxlYXNlIGRvIHdyaXRlLXVwIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMgYW5k IGJyaW5nIHRoZW0gdG8gdGhlIGxpc3QgYW5kL29yIGlzc3VlDQo+dHJhY2tlci4NCj4NCj5UaHgu DQo+LVJhag0KPg0KPi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+RnJvbTogZXh0IFN0ZWZh bm8gRmFjY2luIFttYWlsdG86c2ZhY2NpbkByaW0uY29tXQ0KPlNlbnQ6IEZyaWRheSwgQXVndXN0 IDEyLCAyMDExIDE6NDEgUE0NCj5UbzogUGF0aWwgQmFzYXZhcmFqIChOb2tpYS1DSUMvRGFsbGFz KQ0KPkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSRTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3Vz IGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IEktRA0KPmRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2It MDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRvYz8NCj4NCj5SYWosDQo+VGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgY2xhcmlmaWNh dGlvbi4gUGVyc29uYWxseSwgSSBiZWxpZXZlIHdlIGFyZSBqdXN0DQo+cG9zdHBvbmluZyB0aGUg ZGlzY3Vzc2lvbi4gSWYgc29sdXRpb25zIGhhZCBpbmRlZWQgYmVlbiBwcm9wb3NlZCwgb25lDQo+ d291bGQgaGF2ZSBoYWQgYSBjaGFuY2UgdG8ga2VlcCBhbiBvcGVuIG1pbmQgaW4gY29uc2lkZXJp bmcgaXQuIEZvciB0aGlzDQo+cmVhc29uLCBJIGhhdmUgbm8gY2hvaWNlIGJ1dCBtYWludGFpbmlu ZyBteSBpbmRpY2F0aW9uIGFzIGEgIk5PIi4NCj5DaGVlcnMsDQo+DQo+U3RlZmFubyBGYWNjaW4N Cj4NCj5TdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFuYWdlcg0KPlJlc2VhcmNoIEluIE1vdGlvbiBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbg0K PjUwMDAgUml2ZXJzaWRlIERyaXZlDQo+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAw DQo+SXJ2aW5nLCBUZXhhcyA3NTAzOSBVU0ENCj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KPg0KPk9m ZmljZTogKDk3MikgOTEwIDM0NTENCj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+TW9iaWxlIDogKDUx MCkgMjMwIDg0MjINCj53d3cucmltLmNvbTsgd3d3LmJsYWNrYmVycnkuY29tDQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+ 74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcuDQo+DQo+DQo+LS0t LS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj5Gcm9tOiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29t IFttYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbV0NCj5TZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEF1Z3Vz dCAxMiwgMjAxMSAxMTozNyBBTQ0KPlRvOiBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KPkNjOiBuZXRleHRAaWV0 Zi5vcmcNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGw6IEFkb3B0IEktRA0K PmRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIGRv Yz8NCj4NCj4NCj5IaSBTdGVmYW5vLA0KPg0KPlRoZSBjaGFpcnMgd2lsbCBtb25pdG9yIHRoZSBk aXNjdXNzaW9uIGNsb3NlbHkgYW5kIGFueSBwcm9wb3NlZCBzb2x1dGlvbnMNCj50byB0aGUgaXNz dWVzIHRoYXQgYXJlIHJhaXNlZC4gVW5sZXNzIHdlKGNoYWlycyksIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgcmFpc2lu ZyB0aGUNCj5pc3N1ZSwgYXMgd2VsbCBhcyB0aGUgV0cgbWVtYmVycywgYXJlIG5vdCBzYXRpc2Zp ZWQgd2l0aCB0aGUgcmVzb2x1dGlvbiB3ZQ0KPndpbGwgbm90IHByb2dyZXNzIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVu dC4NCj5UaGUgcG9pbnQgYWJvdXQgdGhlIHByb2Nlc3MgaGVyZSBpcyB0aGF0IGF0IHRoZSBtb21l bnQgd2UgYXJlIHNwaW5uaW5nDQo+d2hlZWxzIHdpdGhvdXQgbWFraW5nIGFueSBmb3J3YXJkIHBy b2dyZXNzLiBXaXRoIGEgbW9yZSBmb3JtYWwgYXBwcm9hY2ggdG8NCj50aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBh bmQgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSB0b29scywgd2UgaG9wZSB0byBhdm9pZCBkaXNjdXNzaW9ucyB0aGF0IGFy ZQ0KPmluIGFuIHVuZW5kaW5nIGxvb3AuIEkgZG8gaG9wZSB0aGF0IGZvbGtzIHdobyByYWlzZSBp c3N1ZXMgYXJlIGFsc28NCj53aWxsaW5nIHRvIGxpc3RlbiB0byBzb2x1dGlvbnMgd2l0aCBhbiBv cGVuIG1pbmQuDQo+DQo+LVJhag0KPg0KPk9uIDgvMTIvMTEgMToyOSBQTSwgImV4dCBTdGVmYW5v IEZhY2NpbiIgPHNmYWNjaW5AcmltLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+DQo+PlJhaiwNCj4+TWF5IEkgYXNr IGEgcXVlc3Rpb24gcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBwcm9jZXNzPyBZb3UgY2xhaW0gdGhlIGlzc3VlcyBh cmUgbm90DQo+PnNob3cgc3RvcHBlcnMuIExldCdzIGFzc3VtZSB3ZSBwcm9jZWVkIGFuZCBoYW5k bGUgdGhlbSBpbiB0aGUgZGF0YQ0KPj50cmFja2VyIHRvIGRpc3NhdGlzZmFjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGUg cGVvcGxlIHJhaXNpbmcgdGhlbS4gV2hhdCB0aGVuPyBIb3cNCj4+d291bGQgeW91IGFjaGlldmUg cHJvZ3Jlc3MgdGhlbj8NCj4+DQo+PlN0ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQo+Pg0KPj5TdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFu YWdlcg0KPj5SZXNlYXJjaCBJbiBNb3Rpb24gQ29ycG9yYXRpb24NCj4+NTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUg RHJpdmUNCj4+QnVpbGRpbmcgNiwgQnJhem9zIEVhc3QsIFN0ZS4gMTAwDQo+PklydmluZywgVGV4 YXMgNzUwMzkgVVNBDQo+Pk5vdGU6IGxvY2F0ZWQgaW4gUFNUDQo+Pg0KPj5PZmZpY2U6ICg5NzIp IDkxMCAzNDUxDQo+PkludGVybmFsOiA4MjAuNjM0NTENCj4+TW9iaWxlIDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0 MjINCj4+d3d3LnJpbS5jb207IHd3dy5ibGFja2JlcnJ5LmNvbQ0KPj4NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj7vgZAg Q29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IGJlZm9yZSBwcmludGluZy4NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4tLS0t LU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPj5Gcm9tOiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29t IFttYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbV0NCj4+U2VudDogRnJpZGF5LCBBdWd1 c3QgMTIsIDIwMTEgMTE6MjAgQU0NCj4+VG86IFN0ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQo+PkNjOiBuZXRleHRA aWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+U3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtuZXRleHRdIENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBBZG9wdCBJ LUQNCj4+ZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMyBhcyBOZXRleHQg V0cgZG9jPw0KPj4NCj4+DQo+PkhpIFN0ZWZhbm8sDQo+Pg0KPj5BcyBJIHJlcGxpZWQgdG8gSnVs aWVuLCBJIHJlYWxpemUgdGhhdCB3ZSBoYXZlIGRpc2N1c3NlZCBzZXZlcmFsIGFzcGVjdHMNCj4+ b2YgdGhlIEktRCBtdWx0aXBsZSB0aW1lcy4gQnV0IEkgZG8gbm90IGJlbGlldmUgdGhlcmUgYXJl IGlzc3VlcyB3aGljaA0KPj5jb3VsZCBiZSB0ZXJtZWQgYXMgImZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIiB0byB0aGUg cHJvdG9jb2wuDQo+PkhlbmNlIG15IHN1Z2dlc3Rpb24gd291bGQgYmUgZm9yIGZvbGtzIHRvIHJh aXNlIHRoZXNlIGlzc3VlcyB0aHJvdWdoIHRoZQ0KPj50cmFja2VyIGluIGEgZm9ybWFsIG1hbm5l ciB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCB0aGV5IGFyZSByZXNvbHZlZCB0byB0aGUNCj4+c2F0aXNmYWN0aW9u IG9mIGFsbC4gUGxlYXNlIHRha2UgdGhlIHRpbWUgdG8gZnJhbWUgeW91ciBjb25jZXJucyBhbmQN Cj4+aXNzdWVzIG9uIHRoZSBNTCBhbmQgdGhyb3VnaCB0aGUgaXNzdWUgdHJhY2tlci4NCj4+DQo+ Pi1SYWoNCj4+DQo+Pk9uIDgvMTIvMTEgMTowOSBQTSwgImV4dCBTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2NpbiIgPHNm YWNjaW5AcmltLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+Pg0KPj4+SGVsbG8gUmFqLA0KPj4+SSBjYW5ub3QgaGVs cCBidXQgc3VwcG9ydCBKdWxpZW4ncyB2aWV3LiBIZSBpcyBjb3JyZWN0IHRoYXQgc29tZSBwb2lu dHMNCj4+PndlcmUgcmFpc2VkIG5vdCBvbmNlLCBub3QgdHdpY2UsIGJ1dCBzZXZlcmFsIHRpbWVz LCBhbmQgaGF2ZSBzdGlsbCBub3QNCj4+PmJlZW4gYWRkcmVzc2VkLiANCj4+Pg0KPj4+TXkgYW5z d2VyIHRvIHlvdXIgcXVlc3Rpb24gaXMNCj4+Pg0KPj4+PiBROiBTaG91bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMg TmV0ZXh0IFdHIEktRCB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQ6DQo+Pj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQt cG1pcHY2LWZsb3dtb2ItMDMgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4+PiBzdGFydGlu ZyBwb2ludCBpbiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZlYXR1cmUgZm9yIFByb3h5 DQo+Pj4+IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Pw0KPj4+Pg0KPj4+WWVzICBbICAgIF0NCj4+Pk5vICAgIFsgWCBd DQo+Pj4NCj4+PkNoZWVycywNCj4+PlN0ZWZhbm8gRmFjY2luDQo+Pj4NCj4+PlN0YW5kYXJkcyBN YW5hZ2VyDQo+Pj5SZXNlYXJjaCBJbiBNb3Rpb24gQ29ycG9yYXRpb24NCj4+PjUwMDAgUml2ZXJz aWRlIERyaXZlDQo+Pj5CdWlsZGluZyA2LCBCcmF6b3MgRWFzdCwgU3RlLiAxMDANCj4+Pklydmlu ZywgVGV4YXMgNzUwMzkgVVNBDQo+Pj5Ob3RlOiBsb2NhdGVkIGluIFBTVA0KPj4+DQo+Pj5PZmZp Y2U6ICg5NzIpIDkxMCAzNDUxDQo+Pj5JbnRlcm5hbDogODIwLjYzNDUxDQo+Pj5Nb2JpbGUgOiAo NTEwKSAyMzAgODQyMg0KPj4+d3d3LnJpbS5jb207IHd3dy5ibGFja2JlcnJ5LmNvbQ0KPj4+DQo+ Pj4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+74GQIENvbnNpZGVyIHRoZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCBiZWZvcmUgcHJpbnRpbmcu DQo+Pj4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+DQo+Pj5PbiBXZWQsIEF1ZyAxMCwgMjAxMSBhdCAyOjE5IFBNLCAgPEJh c2F2YXJhai5QYXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPj4+PiBIZWxsbywNCj4+Pj4NCj4+Pj4g QXQgSUVURjgxIHRoZSBjaGFpcnMgbWFkZSBhIHByb3Bvc2FsIHRvIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIEktRDog UHJveHkgTW9iaWxlDQo+Pj4+SVB2Ng0KPj4+PiBFeHRlbnNpb25zIHRvIFN1cHBvcnQgRmxvdyBN b2JpbGl0eQ0KPj4+PiA8ZHJhZnQtYmVybmFyZG9zLW5ldGV4dC1wbWlwdjYtZmxvd21vYi0wMz4g QXMgdGhlIHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IGZvcg0KPj4+PiB0aGUgc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbiBkZWZpbmlu ZyBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZvciBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Ni4NCj4+Pj4gV2UgZ2F1Z2VkIHN1 cHBvcnQgZm9yIGFuZCBhZ2FpbnN0IGFkb3B0aW5nIHRoaXMgSS1EIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEgV0cN Cj4+Pj4gbWVldGluZyB3aXRoIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgcmVzdWx0Og0KPj4+Pg0KPj4+PiBJbiBm YXZvcjogMTgNCj4+Pj4gT3Bwb3NlZDogTm9uZQ0KPj4+Pg0KPj4+PiBBcyBwZXIgcHJvY2VzcyB3 ZSBhcmUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIG9uIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Qgd2l0aCB0aGUgc2FtZQ0KPj4+ PiBxdWVzdGlvbi4gUGxlYXNlIHJlc3BvbmQgYnkgQXVnIDE4dGgsIDIwMTEgdG8gdGhlIHF1ZXN0 aW9uIGJlbG93Og0KPj4+Pg0KPj4+PiBROiBTaG91bGQgd2UgYWRvcHQgYXMgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIEkt RCB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQ6DQo+Pj4+IGRyYWZ0LWJlcm5hcmRvcy1uZXRleHQtcG1pcHY2LWZsb3dt b2ItMDMgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIHRoZQ0KPj4+PiBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBpbiBz cGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZlYXR1cmUgZm9yIFByb3h5DQo+Pj4+IE1vYmls ZSBJUHY2Pw0KPj4+Pg0KPj4+PiBZZXMgICBbIF0NCj4+Pj4gTm8gICAgWyBdDQo+Pj4+DQo+Pj4+ DQo+Pj4+IC1DaGFpcnMNCj4+Pj4NCj4+Pj4gSUVURjgxIFdHIG1pbnV0ZXMgYXJlIHBvc3RlZCBh dDoNCj4+Pj4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4 dC50eHQNCj4+Pj4NCj4+Pj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX18NCj4+Pj4gbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4+PiBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcN Cj4+Pj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9uZXRleHQNCj4+Pj4N Cj4+Pl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+Pj5u ZXRleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+Pj5uZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+Pmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lmll dGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQo+Pj4NCj4+Pi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPj4+ VGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gKGluY2x1ZGluZyBhbnkgYXR0YWNobWVudHMpIG1heSBjb250YWlu IGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbA0KPj4+aW5mb3JtYXRpb24sIHByaXZpbGVnZWQgbWF0ZXJpYWwgKGluY2x1 ZGluZyBtYXRlcmlhbCBwcm90ZWN0ZWQgYnkgdGhlDQo+Pj5zb2xpY2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90 aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUNCj4+Pm5vbi1wdWJsaWMg aW5mb3JtYXRpb24uIEFueSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBieSBhbnlvbmUgb3RoZXIg dGhhbg0KPj4+dGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkLiBJZiB5b3UgaGF2 ZSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzDQo+Pj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlh dGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj4+PnRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24g ZnJvbSB5b3VyIHN5c3RlbS4gVXNlLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24sIG9yDQo+ Pj5yZXByb2R1Y3Rpb24gb2YgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gYnkgdW5pbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGll bnRzIGlzIG5vdA0KPj4+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0KPj4NCj4+DQo+ Pi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPj5UaGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGFueSBhdHRhY2ht ZW50cykgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50aWFsDQo+PmluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBwcml2aWxlZ2Vk IG1hdGVyaWFsIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWF0ZXJpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGVkIGJ5IHRoZQ0KPj5zb2xpY2l0 b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUN Cj4+bm9uLXB1YmxpYyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gQW55IHVzZSBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGJ5 IGFueW9uZSBvdGhlciB0aGFuDQo+PnRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliaXRl ZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcw0KPj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBs ZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj4+dGhpcyBp bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBmcm9tIHlvdXIgc3lzdGVtLiBVc2UsIGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1 dGlvbiwgb3INCj4+cmVwcm9kdWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IHVuaW50ZW5k ZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50cyBpcyBub3QNCj4+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0K Pg0KPg0KPi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPlRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgYW55IGF0 dGFjaG1lbnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwNCj5pbmZvcm1hdGlvbiwgcHJpdmls ZWdlZCBtYXRlcmlhbCAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFsIHByb3RlY3RlZCBieSB0aGUNCj5zb2xp Y2l0b3ItY2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1 dGUNCj5ub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24g YnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4NCj50aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHByb2hpYml0 ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMNCj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBs ZWFzZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj50aGlzIGlu Zm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiwgZGlzdHJpYnV0 aW9uLCBvcg0KPnJlcHJvZHVjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVuZGVk IHJlY2lwaWVudHMgaXMgbm90DQo+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0KPg0K Pi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPlRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgYW55IGF0dGFjaG1l bnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwNCj5pbmZvcm1hdGlvbiwgcHJpdmlsZWdlZCBt YXRlcmlhbCAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1hdGVyaWFsIHByb3RlY3RlZCBieSB0aGUNCj5zb2xpY2l0b3It Y2xpZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcHJpdmlsZWdlcyksIG9yIGNvbnN0aXR1dGUNCj5u b24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gYnkgYW55 b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4NCj50aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50IGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIElm IHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMNCj50cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFzZSBp bW1lZGlhdGVseSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGFuZCBkZWxldGUNCj50aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0 aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiwgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBv cg0KPnJlcHJvZHVjdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBieSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lw aWVudHMgaXMgbm90DQo+YXV0aG9yaXplZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVubGF3ZnVsLg0KDQo= From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 12 12:20:37 2011 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 A005D21F85C0 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:20:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.318 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.318 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.472, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, 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 5KW41rd8WKq6 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBB3821F8761 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:20:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh104.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.30]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7CJLB89004398; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:21:12 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:21:11 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.59) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:21:10 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.61]) by 008-AM1MMR1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.59]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:21:10 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUZYTUA//+xJQCAAGH4gP//sQeA Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:21:09 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.137] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="euc-kr" Content-ID: <409CFDA5FE76BC4BA1B24D7A20BED636@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2011 19:21:11.0352 (UTC) FILETIME=[FEAFA380:01CC5924] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 19:20:37 -0000 SGkgSnVsaWVuLA0KDQpPbiA4LzEyLzExIDI6MDMgUE0sICJleHQgSnVsaWVuIExhZ2FuaWVyIiA8 anVsaWVuLmlldGZAZ21haWwuY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KPlJhaiwNCj4NCj4NCj4NCj5PbiBGcmks IEF1ZyAxMiwgMjAxMSBhdCAxMToxMyBBTSwgIDxCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tPiB3 cm90ZToNCj4+DQo+PiBIaSBKdWxpZW4sDQo+Pg0KPj4gT24gOC8xMi8xMSAxMjo1NSBQTSwgImV4 dCBKdWxpZW4gTGFnYW5pZXIiIDxqdWxpZW4uaWV0ZkBnbWFpbC5jb20+DQo+Pndyb3RlOg0KPj4N Cj4+PkhlbGxvIFJhaiwNCj4+Pg0KPj4+V2hpbGUgcGFydHMgb2YgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBhcmUg cmVhc29uYWJsZSBleHRlbnNpb25zIHRvIHRoZSBQTUlQdjYNCj4+PnByb3RvY29sLCBJIGhhdmUg aW5kaWNhdGVkIHJlcGVhdGVkbHkgdGhhdCBJIGhhZCBhIGZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIGlzc3VlDQo+Pj53 aXRoIHRoZSBvdGhlciBwYXJ0IG9mIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCB0aGF0IGxldHMgdGhlIExNQSB1bmls YXRlcmFsbHkNCj4+PmRlY2lkZXMgdG8gbW92ZSBmbG93cy4NCj4+DQo+PiBJIGRvbqn2dCBiZWxp ZXZlIHRoZXJlIGlzIHRoaXMgZnVuZGFtZW50YWwgaXNzdWUgdGhhdCAoeW91IG1lbnRpb24pIGlz IGENCj4+IHNob3ctc3RvcHBlciBpbiB0aGUgY2FzZSBvZiBmbG93IG1vYmlsaXR5IGZvciBQTUlQ Ni4gTXkgcmVjb2xsZWN0aW9uDQo+PmZyb20NCj4+IHByZXZpb3VzIGRpc2N1c3Npb25zIGlzIHRo YXQgdGhlIExNQSBtYWtlcyB0aGUgZGVjaXNpb24gdG8gbW92ZSBhIGZsb3cNCj4+IGJhc2VkIG9u IHNvbWUgcG9saWN5IHdoaWNoIGlzIGVpdGhlciBsb2NhbGx5IGNvbmZpZ3VyZWQgb3Igb2J0YWlu cyBmcm9tDQo+PmFuDQo+PiBleHRlcm5hbCBlbnRpdHkuIFlvdSBtYXkgZGlzYWdyZWUgd2l0aCB0 aGF0IGFwcHJvYWNoLiBXZSBjYW4gZGlzY3Vzcw0KPj50aGlzDQo+PiBpc3N1ZSBmdXJ0aGVyIGFu ZCBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCBpdCBpcyBlaXRoZXIgZmFpcmx5IHJlc29sdmVkIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlDQo+ PiB0cmFja2VyLg0KPj4gTXkgc3VnZ2VzdGlvbiB3b3VsZCBiZSBmb3IgeW91IHRvIHdyaXRlIHVw IHRoaXMgaXNzdWUgYW5kIHVwbG9hZCBpdCB0bw0KPj50aGUNCj4+IHRyYWNrZXIgYW5kIHdlIHdp bGwgcmVzb2x2ZSBpdCB0byB0aGUgc2F0aXNmYWN0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBXRyBtZW1iZXJzLg0KPg0K PkFyZSB5b3UgYXNzZXNzaW5nIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSBJIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBhcyBub3QgZnVuZGFtZW50 YWwgaW4geW91cg0KPmZ1bmN0aW9uIG9mICBXRyBjaGFpcj8NCg0KQXMgV0cgbWVtYmVyLg0KDQo+ DQo+VGhlICJhcHByb2FjaCIgb2YgcmVzb2x2aW5nIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSBieSBtYWtpbmcgaXQgc29t ZW9uZSBlbHNlDQo+cHJvYmxlbXMgZG9lcyBub3QgYWRkcmVzcyB0aGUgZnVuZGFtZW50YWwgaXNz dWUgdGhhdCBpZiBvbmUgb2YgdGhlDQo+TU4ncyByYWRpbyBhY2Nlc3MgaXNuJyB0IHdvcmtpbmcg cHJvcGVybHksIGhhdmluZyB0aGUgTE1BIHVuaWxhdGVycmFseQ0KPmRpcmVjdCBhIGZsb3cgdGhl cmUgd2lsbCBoYXJtIHRoZSBNTiBhYmlsaXR5IHRvIGNvbW11bmljYXRlIHdpdGhvdXQgYQ0KPm1l YW4gZm9yIHRoZSBNTiB0byByZWNvdmVyLg0KDQpUaGFua3MgZm9yIHJlZnJlc2hpbmcgbXkgbWVt b3J5IG9uIHRoaXMgaXNzdWUuDQpTbyB5ZXMsIGFzIHlvdSBoYXZlIG1lbnRpb25lZCBiZWZvcmUg dGhpcyBpcyBhbiBpc3N1ZS4gVGhlIExNQSByZWRpcmVjdGluZw0KYSBmbG93IHRvIGFuIElGL01B RyBhdCB3aGljaCB0aGUgTU4gbWF5IG5vdCBiZSByZWFjaGFibGUgKGFueW1vcmUpIHdpbGwNCnJl c3VsdCBpbiBwYWNrZXRzIGdvaW5nIGludG8gdGhlIHZvaWQuDQoNClRoZSBjb25zZXF1ZW5jZSBv ZiBzdWNoIGEgc2NlbmFyaW8gaXMgcHJldHR5IGRyYXN0aWMgaW4gdGVybXMgb2YgdXNlcg0KZXhw ZXJpZW5jZSBhbmQgZmFpbHVyZSBvZiBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uLg0KQW4gYXBwbGljYXRpb24gbWF5 IGJlIGFibGUgdG8gcmVjb3ZlciBpZiBpdCBoYXMgaXRzIG93biBtZWFucy4gQnV0IHRoYXQgaXMN CmJleW9uZCB0aGUgc2NvcGUgb2YgdGhlIGxheWVyIGF0IHdoaWNoIHdlIGFyZSB3b3JraW5nIG9u IGluIHRoaXMgV0cuDQpUaGVyZSBoYXMgYmVlbiBtZW50aW9uIG9mIHNldmVyYWwgcG9zc2libGUg c29sdXRpb25zIGluY2x1ZGluZyBhIGxheWVyIDINCmJhc2VkIGFwcHJvYWNoIHdoZXJlaW4gdGhl IE1OIGNvdWxkIGluZGljYXRlIHZpYSBpdHMgYWN0aXZlIElGIHRoYXQNCmFub3RoZXIgSUYgdmlh IHdoaWNoIGl0IHdhcyBjb25uZWN0ZWQgdG8gTUFHeCBhbmQgYSBmbG93IHdhcyBiZWluZw0KcmVj ZWl2ZWQgaGFzIHRlcm1pbmF0ZWQuIEkga25vdyB0aGF0IHNvbHV0aW9ucyBhdCBMMiBhcmUgb3V0 LW9mLXNjb3BlIGFuZA0Kc3VjaCBtZWNoYW5pc21zIGhhdmUgdG8gYmUgY3JlYXRlZCBpbiB0aGUg cmVsZXZhbnQgU0RPcyB0aGF0IHNwZWNpZnkNClBIWS9NQUNzLiANCk15IHBvaW50IGlzIHRoYXQg dGhlIEktRCBjb3VsZCBoaWdobGlnaHQgdGhlIGlzc3VlIGFuZCBub3RlIHRoZQ0KY29uc2VxdWVu Y2UgYW5kIHNldmVyaXR5IG9mIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtIHdoaWNoIGNhbiBzZXJ2ZSBhcyBzdWZmaWNp ZW50DQp3YXJuaW5nIHRvIGFueW9uZSB3aG8gd291bGQgY29uc2lkZXIgZGVwbG95aW5nIHRoZSBw cm90b2NvbC4NCkFuZCB0aGF0IGNvdWxkIGJlIG9uZSB3YXkgb2YgZGVhbGluZyB3aXRoIHRoZSBp c3N1ZS4NCiANCj4NCj5TbyB5ZXMgSSBkaXNhZ3JlZS4NCj4NCj5JIGhhdmUgd3JpdHRlbiB0aGUg aXNzdWUgZG93biBvbiB0aGlzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBtYW55LCBtYW55IHRpbWVzLCBJDQo+aGF2 ZSBkaXNjdXNzZWQgIGl0IG1hbnksIG1hbnkgdGltZXMsIGFuZCB0aGUgaXNzdWUgd2FzIG5ldmVy IGFkZHJlc3NlZA0KPmFkZXF1YXRlbHkuDQoNCkFncmVlLiBJdCBoYXMgYmVlbiBkaXNjdXNzZWQg YXQgbGVuZ3RoLiBTZXZlcmFsIHNvbHV0aW9ucyBoYXZlIGFsc28gYmVlbg0KZGlzY3Vzc2VkIGJ1 dCBtYXliZSBub25lIHRoYXQgeW91IGFyZSBjb252aW5jZWQgb2YuDQoNCj4NCj5Zb3VyIGRlbmlh bCB0aGF0IHRoaXMgdGhpcyBmdW5kYW1lbnRhbCBhbHNvIGRvZXMgbm90IGhpbnQgYXQgaG93DQo+ ZnVydGhlciBkaXNjdXNzaW9ucyBjYW4gcG9zc2libHkgcmVzb2x2ZSB0aGF0IGlzc3VlLiBBbmQg a2VlcGluZyB0aGlzDQo+Y29udHJvdmVyc2lhbCBmZWF0dXJlIGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdCBlbnN1cmUg dGhhdCB0aGUgYmFzaXMgb24gd2hpY2ggd2UNCj5kaXNjdXNzIGlzIHVuLWFncmVlYWJsZSB0byBh IG51bWJlciBvZiBwZW9wbGUgaW4gdGhpcyBncm91cCwgYW5kIGlzDQo+ZnVuZGFtZW50YWxseSBi cm9rZW4uIE5vdCBhIHZlcnkgZ29vZCBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBJTUhPLg0KDQpJdCBpcyBhIGZ1 bmRhbWVudGFsIGlzc3VlLi4uIEdpdmVuIHRoYXQgdGhlIE1OIGhhcyBubyB3YXkgdG8gaW5kaWNh dGUgaWYNCmFub3RoZXIgSUYgdmlhIHdoaWNoIGl0IHdhcyBjb25uZWN0ZWQgaGFzIGdvbmUgZG93 biBhdCBMMy4gTGV0cyBzZWUgaWYNCmZvbGtzIGhhdmUgYSBnb29kIHNvbHV0aW9uIHRoYXQgdGhl eSBjYW4gY29tZSB1cCB3aXRoLg0KDQotUmFqDQoNCj4NCj4tLWp1bGllbg0KDQo= From julien.ietf@gmail.com Fri Aug 12 13:12:02 2011 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 6C3F821F8453 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:02 -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 PlurIGN5j+YP for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5506D21F8432 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so2741181wyg.31 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UeFadOYJxz6DeV9aTr5XpGEcqP/Ric7XXev2EZ0fGqA=; b=PUq7081iWRm/CwgqRZJH1yvYo3ADzoU/jBZRxaejiQsTudY2OeNAOhHduLGDv0k2Z3 e87qiFexHf/7GlaXCq6rVtNa6ABQBNaKy8ER3d/yKFWl79YGvsC9ELk0ACBDoKf1LHLW Ie3T/0U9aQ4aPjZhPMRBwqztLVqabhJ5GbkfY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.2.129 with SMTP id 1mr1230420wbj.39.1313179958710; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.59.147 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:12:38 -0700 Message-ID: From: Julien Laganier To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 12 Aug 2011 20:12:02 -0000 Hi Raj, In your message below you agree that this is a fundamental issue of which consequences are "pretty drastic in terms of user experience and failure of communication". Working within the Internet layer, placing an application in a situation in which it fails without being able to recover constitutes a blatant lack of protocol correctness. Since you also acknowledge that so far no good solution to this has been put forth, it is only logic to not include the offending feature in the draft to be adopted by the WG, so that we can build upon a correct baseline. I will be more than happy to see the draft extended with a mechanism that provides the feature at stake when it is shown to exhibit correctness at the Internet layer. --julien 2011/8/12 : > Hi Julien, > > On 8/12/11 2:03 PM, "ext Julien Laganier" wrote: > >>Raj, >> >> >> >>On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:13 AM, =A0 wrote: >>> >>> Hi Julien, >>> >>> On 8/12/11 12:55 PM, "ext Julien Laganier" >>>wrote: >>> >>>>Hello Raj, >>>> >>>>While parts of this document are reasonable extensions to the PMIPv6 >>>>protocol, I have indicated repeatedly that I had a fundamental issue >>>>with the other part of the document that lets the LMA unilaterally >>>>decides to move flows. >>> >>> I don=B9t believe there is this fundamental issue that (you mention) is= a >>> show-stopper in the case of flow mobility for PMIP6. My recollection >>>from >>> previous discussions is that the LMA makes the decision to move a flow >>> based on some policy which is either locally configured or obtains from >>>an >>> external entity. You may disagree with that approach. We can discuss >>>this >>> issue further and ensure that it is either fairly resolved through the >>> tracker. >>> My suggestion would be for you to write up this issue and upload it to >>>the >>> tracker and we will resolve it to the satisfaction of the WG members. >> >>Are you assessing the issue I described as not fundamental in your >>function of =A0WG chair? > > As WG member. > >> >>The "approach" of resolving the issue by making it someone else >>problems does not address the fundamental issue that if one of the >>MN's radio access isn' t working properly, having the LMA unilaterraly >>direct a flow there will harm the MN ability to communicate without a >>mean for the MN to recover. > > Thanks for refreshing my memory on this issue. > So yes, as you have mentioned before this is an issue. The LMA redirectin= g > a flow to an IF/MAG at which the MN may not be reachable (anymore) will > result in packets going into the void. > > The consequence of such a scenario is pretty drastic in terms of user > experience and failure of communication. > An application may be able to recover if it has its own means. But that i= s > beyond the scope of the layer at which we are working on in this WG. > There has been mention of several possible solutions including a layer 2 > based approach wherein the MN could indicate via its active IF that > another IF via which it was connected to MAGx and a flow was being > received has terminated. I know that solutions at L2 are out-of-scope and > such mechanisms have to be created in the relevant SDOs that specify > PHY/MACs. > My point is that the I-D could highlight the issue and note the > consequence and severity of the problem which can serve as sufficient > warning to anyone who would consider deploying the protocol. > And that could be one way of dealing with the issue. > >> >>So yes I disagree. >> >>I have written the issue down on this mailing list many, many times, I >>have discussed =A0it many, many times, and the issue was never addressed >>adequately. > > Agree. It has been discussed at length. Several solutions have also been > discussed but maybe none that you are convinced of. > >> >>Your denial that this this fundamental also does not hint at how >>further discussions can possibly resolve that issue. And keeping this >>controversial feature in the draft ensure that the basis on which we >>discuss is un-agreeable to a number of people in this group, and is >>fundamentally broken. Not a very good starting point IMHO. > > It is a fundamental issue... Given that the MN has no way to indicate if > another IF via which it was connected has gone down at L3. Lets see if > folks have a good solution that they can come up with. > > -Raj > >> >>--julien > > From xiayangsong@huawei.com Fri Aug 12 18:04:17 2011 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 6A01A11E8084 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:04:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 OwYEf39ynbeN for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usaga04-in.huawei.com (usaga04-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6E611E807E for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (usaga04-in [172.18.4.101]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LPU00MJIDO6UG@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for netext@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:04:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.18.4.104]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LPU00EA5DO5WE@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for netext@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:04:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from DFWEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:04:55 -0700 Received: from DFWEML504-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.122]) by DFWEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:04:53 -0700 Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:04:52 +0000 From: xiayangsong In-reply-to: X-Originating-IP: [10.193.217.75] To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Accept-Language: en-US Thread-topic: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UZ+QfA X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: References: Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:04:17 -0000 Hi Chairs My response is Yes and Yes. At the same time, I would like to encourage authors to elaborate the scenarios of applications of this option. I assume this is mainly for WLAN. Is there any consideration regarding WiMAX/LTE and variants? BR Frank -----Original Message----- From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:08 PM To: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Was discussed at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: " 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please respond to the following questions: Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as described in I-D: draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? Yes [ ] No [ ] Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point for working on this feature in the WG? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. -Chairs _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com Mon Aug 15 18:12:57 2011 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 E7BA121F8CAD for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:12:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] 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 J2BAvOLIZ7XY for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:12:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mei.co.jp (smtp.mei.co.jp [133.183.100.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD4921F8CAB for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:12:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com ([157.8.1.157]) by smtp.mei.co.jp (8.12.11.20060614/3.7W/kc-maile11) with ESMTP id p7G1DeIX027701; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:13:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from pslexc01.psl.local ([10.81.112.5]) by mail.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/kc-maili16) with ESMTP id p7G1De312325; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:13:40 +0900 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([10.81.112.4]) by pslexc01.psl.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:13:31 +0800 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713]) by pslexc02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713%14]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:13:39 +0800 From: Mohana Jeyatharan To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? Thread-Index: AQHMV6MuHZ6NbgcL2k6ZQy/+0fAoQZUesw3w Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:13:37 +0000 Message-ID: <3B9866CDE401014DB02613517E88E1E60576BD26@pslexc02.psl.local> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.81.113.96] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2011 01:13:31.0941 (UTC) FILETIME=[B6B2C550:01CC5BB1] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? 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, 16 Aug 2011 01:12:57 -0000 Hi Raj, all, I support the adoption of this draft. Yes [x]. BR, Mohana > -----Original Message----- > From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:19 AM > To: netext@ietf.org > Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6= - > flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc? >=20 > Hello, >=20 > At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv= 6 > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility flowmob-03> As the starting point for the specification defining flow mob= ility > for Proxy Mobile IPv6. > We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG > meeting with the following result: >=20 > In favor: 18 > Opposed: None >=20 > As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same > question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below: >=20 > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document: > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy Mobile I= Pv6? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 >=20 > -Chairs >=20 > IETF81 WG minutes are posted at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com Mon Aug 15 18:13:01 2011 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 B700721F8CC5 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:13:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] 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 pqigBkPUNexM for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mei.co.jp (smtp.mei.co.jp [133.183.100.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E0921F8CC4 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com ([157.8.1.157]) by smtp.mei.co.jp (8.12.11.20060614/3.7W/kc-maile13) with ESMTP id p7G1DlUS023552; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:13:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from pslexc01.psl.local ([10.81.112.5]) by mail.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/kc-maili14) with ESMTP id p7G1Dkd12344; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:13:47 +0900 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([10.81.112.4]) by pslexc01.psl.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:13:38 +0800 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713]) by pslexc02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713%14]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:13:46 +0800 From: Mohana Jeyatharan To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UetFBA Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:13:45 +0000 Message-ID: <3B9866CDE401014DB02613517E88E1E60576BD2B@pslexc02.psl.local> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.81.113.96] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2011 01:13:38.0347 (UTC) FILETIME=[BA843FB0:01CC5BB1] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 16 Aug 2011 01:13:01 -0000 Hi all, I support the adoption of this draft. The answers to the questions are: [1] Yes [2] Yes BR, Mohana > -----Original Message----- > From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 6:08 AM > To: netext@ietf.org > Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Opti= on > for Proxy Mobile IPv6? >=20 >=20 > The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > Was discussed at > the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. >=20 > Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: > " > 5 have read the draft > 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it > 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT " >=20 > This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So plea= se > respond to the following questions: >=20 > Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option= as > described in I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 > Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting poin= t > for working on this feature in the WG? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 >=20 > Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. >=20 > -Chairs >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com Mon Aug 15 18:19:08 2011 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 BB1C021F8CFE for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:19:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] 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 j2s0Mw6GqKZF for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mei.co.jp (smtp.mei.co.jp [133.183.100.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1890021F8CEB for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:19:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com ([157.8.1.157]) by smtp.mei.co.jp (8.12.11.20060614/3.7W/kc-maile11) with ESMTP id p7G1JsJD002081; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:19:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from pslexc01.psl.local ([10.81.112.5]) by mail.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/kc-maili12) with ESMTP id p7G1Jsw18029; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:19:54 +0900 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([10.81.112.4]) by pslexc01.psl.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:19:45 +0800 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713]) by pslexc02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713%14]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:19:53 +0800 From: Mohana Jeyatharan To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUetjaQ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:19:52 +0000 Message-ID: <3B9866CDE401014DB02613517E88E1E60576BD5A@pslexc02.psl.local> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.81.113.96] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2011 01:19:45.0433 (UTC) FILETIME=[95512090:01CC5BB2] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 16 Aug 2011 01:19:08 -0000 Hi Raj, all, I support the adoption of this document. The answers to the questions are: [1] Yes [2] Yes BR, Mohana > -----Original Message----- > From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:52 AM > To: netext@ietf.org > Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature= as > specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option >=20 >=20 >=20 > At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Sele= ctor > Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > >=20 > Abstract >=20 > This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option > for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access > gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. > Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility > anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on > the selected IP flows. >=20 > Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to > IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. >=20 > The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this = is > a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the > minutes: > " > 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. > " >=20 > As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML > before making a decision. >=20 > Questions: >=20 > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of intere= st to > the WG? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as th= e > starting point in specifying the solution? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. >=20 > -Chairs >=20 > The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedin= gs. > Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available > at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com Mon Aug 15 18:35:01 2011 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 8D27511E8086 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:35:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] 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 BsHfshRhvOz1 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mei.co.jp (smtp.mei.co.jp [133.183.100.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D846611E8070 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com ([157.8.1.157]) by smtp.mei.co.jp (8.12.11.20060614/3.7W/kc-maile12) with ESMTP id p7G1EXqR022905; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:14:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from pslexc01.psl.local ([10.81.112.5]) by mail.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/kc-maili17) with ESMTP id p7G1EXf12624; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:14:33 +0900 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([10.81.112.4]) by pslexc01.psl.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:14:25 +0800 Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713]) by pslexc02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713%14]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:14:32 +0800 From: Mohana Jeyatharan To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option Thread-Index: AQHMV6e2nRIxJbBIkkC03uyU0YByhpUes8Kw Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:14:31 +0000 Message-ID: <3B9866CDE401014DB02613517E88E1E60576BD40@pslexc02.psl.local> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.81.113.96] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2011 01:14:25.0019 (UTC) FILETIME=[D655D4B0:01CC5BB1] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 16 Aug 2011 01:35:01 -0000 Hi Raj, all, I support the adoption of this draft. The answers are: [1] Yes [2] Yes BR, Mohana > -----Original Message----- > From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:52 AM > To: netext@ietf.org > Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature= as > specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option >=20 >=20 >=20 > At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload Sele= ctor > Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > >=20 > Abstract >=20 > This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option > for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access > gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. > Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility > anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on > the selected IP flows. >=20 > Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to > IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. >=20 > The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that this = is > a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the > minutes: > " > 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. > " >=20 > As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG ML > before making a decision. >=20 > Questions: >=20 > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of intere= st to > the WG? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as th= e > starting point in specifying the solution? >=20 > Yes [ ] > No [ ] >=20 > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. >=20 > -Chairs >=20 > The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 proceedin= gs. > Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available > at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Tue Aug 16 05:21:35 2011 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 9C9D121F8A4D for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:21:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -93.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-93.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.723, BAYES_50=0.001, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345, 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 0uK+wzsBRrt0 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18EC621F86F6 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.99] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 131321465182496; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:10:12 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.21] by [192.168.168.15] with StormMail ESMTP id 94545.5957719183; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:22:10 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse02.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p7GCM4UM005303; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:22:04 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn) In-Reply-To: To: Jong-Hyouk Lee MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: 9AAD9C93:D9E4F827-482578EE:0043563D; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007 Message-ID: From: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:22:04 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-08-16 20:22:08, Serialize complete at 2011-08-16 20:22:08 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0043CF2D482578EE_=" X-MAIL: mse02.zte.com.cn p7GCM4UM005303 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogUmU6ICBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogV29yayBv?= =?gb2312?b?biBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHByZWZpeCBkZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvciBQcm94eSBNb2Jp?= =?gb2312?b?bGUgSVB2Nj8=?= 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, 16 Aug 2011 12:21:35 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0043CF2D482578EE_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGVsbG8gTGVlLA0KTWFueSB0aGFua3MgZm9yIHlvdXIgc3VwcG9ydC4gSSB3aWxsIHJlYWQgdGhl IHJlZmVyZW5jZSBtYXRlcmlhbHMgeW91IA0KcHJvdmlkZS4gUmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBjb21tZW50 LCBJIHdpbGwgZGV0YWlscyB0aGUgdXNlIGNhc2UgaW4gdGhlIGZ1dHVyZSANCnZlcnNpb24uDQoN CkJlc3QgUmVnYXJkcywNCkpveQ0KDQoNCg0KSm9uZy1IeW91ayBMZWUgPGpvbmctaHlvdWsubGVl QGlucmlhLmZyPiANCjIwMTEtMDgtMTEgz8LO5yAwOTo1MA0KDQrK1bz+yMsNCnpob3UueGluZ3l1 ZUB6dGUuY29tLmNuDQqzrcvNDQpEaXJrLnZvbi1IdWdvQHRlbGVrb20uZGUsIEJhc2F2YXJhai5Q YXRpbEBub2tpYS5jb20sIG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0K1vfM4g0KUmU6IFtuZXRleHRdIENvbnNl bnN1cyBjYWxsOiBXb3JrIG9uIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgcHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yIA0KUHJv eHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjY/DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpRMTogWWVzLg0KUTI6IFllcy4NCg0KQ29tbWVu dHM6IEFzIHBvaW50ZWQsIHRoZSB1c2UgY2FzZXMgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHByb3ZpZGVkIGFuZCBwZXJz b25hbGx5IEkgDQp3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIGludHJvZHVjZSB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGFydGljbGVz IHJlY2VudGx5IHB1Ymxpc2hlZDoNCg0KMS4gTGlnaHR3ZWlnaHQgTkV0d29yayBNT2JpbGl0eSB3 aXRoaW4gUE1JUHY2IGZvciBUcmFuc3BvcnRhdGlvbiBTeXN0ZW1zIiwgDQpJRUVFIFN5c3RlbXMg Sm91cm5hbDogaHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTEwOS9KU1lTVC4yMDExLjIxNTg2ODENCjIu IFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIEFuYWx5c2lzIG9mIFBNSVB2NiBiYXNlZCBORXR3b3JrIE1PYmlsaXR5IGZv ciBJbnRlbGxpZ2VudCANClRyYW5zcG9ydGF0aW9uIFN5c3RlbXMiLCBJRUVFIFRyYW5zYWN0aW9u cyBvbiBWZWhpY3VsYXIgVGVjaG5vbG9neTogDQpodHRwOi8vZHguZG9pLm9yZy8xMC4xMTA5L1RW VC4yMDExLjIxNTc5NDkNCg0KQ2hlZXJzLg0KDQpPbiBUaHUsIEF1ZyAxMSwgMjAxMSBhdCAyOjA4 IFBNLCA8RGlyay52b24tSHVnb0B0ZWxla29tLmRlPiB3cm90ZToNClExOiBZZXMNClEyOiBZZXMN CkNvbW1lbnQ6IHBsZWFzZSBwcm92aWRlIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscyBvbiB0aGUgdXNlIGNhc2UgaW4g V0cgSS1ELCBlLmcuIHRoZSANCnBocmFzZQ0KJ0l0IGFzc3VtZXMgdGhhdCBhIE1SIFtpLmUuIE1v YmlsZSBSb3V0ZXJdIGlzIGEgcmVndWxhciBJUHY2IHJvdXRlciANCndpdGhvdXQgZXh0ZW5zaW9u IGZvciBtb2JpbGl0eSBtYW5hZ2VtZW50cy4nIHNvdW5kcyBhIGJpdCBzdHJhbmdlIHRvIG1lIA0K Li4uDQoNClRoYW5rcyENCg0KUmVnYXJkcw0KRGlyaw0KDQoNCltuZXRleHRdIENvbnNlbnN1cyBj YWxsOiBXb3JrIG9uIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgcHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5IA0KTW9i aWxlIElQdjY/DQoNCg0KQXQgSUVURjgxLCBDYXJsIFdpbGxpYW1zIHByZXNlbnRlZCB0aGUgSS1E OiAiUHJlZml4IERlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yDQpQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2NiIgPGRyYWZ0LXpob3Ut bmV0ZXh0LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0Pg0KDQpHZW5lcmFsIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBhdCB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0 IFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2FzIHRoYXQgcHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24NCmlzIGEgcmVxdWlyZWQgZmVh dHVyZSBmb3IgUE1JUDYuIFdlIGdhdWdlZCB0aGUgaW50ZXJlc3QgaW4gdGhlIHJvb20gdG8NCmFk b3B0IHRoaXMgSS1EIGFzIHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBvZiBhIFdHIEktRCBmb3IgdGhlIFBE IGZlYXR1cmUNCmFuZCBvYnNlcnZlZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nOg0KDQoiDQpDaGFpcnM6IGhvdyBt YW55IHBlb3BsZSB0aGluayB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbSBpcyByZWxldmFudDogMTkNCkhvdyBtYW55IGhh dmUgcmVhZCBpdDogNw0KSG93IG1hbnkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvcG9zZWQgc29sdXRpb24g aW4gdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGNhbiBiZSBzdGFydGluZw0KcG9pbnQgdG8gd29yayBvbiB0aGUgcHJvYmxl bT8NCkluIGZhdm9yOiA3IDsgIE9wcG9zZWQ6IDENCiINCg0KV2UgYXJlIG5vdyBmb2xsb3dpbmcg dXAgd2l0aCB0aGUgcXVlc3Rpb25zIG9uIHRoZSBNTC4NCg0KUXVlc3Rpb24gdG8gV0c6DQoNCjEu IFNob3VsZCB0aGUgV0cgc3BlY2lmeSBwcmVmaXgtZGVsZWdhdGlvbiBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBQTUlQ Nj8NCg0KWWVzICAgWyBdDQpObyAgICBbIF0NCg0KMi4gQ2FuIHdlIGFkb3B0IGFzIFdHIGRvY3Vt ZW50IHRoZSBzb2x1dGlvbiBwcm9wb3NlZCBpbiBJLUQ6DQpkcmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1wZC1w bWlwLTAxLnR4dCBhcyB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgb2YgdGhpcw0KZmVhdHVyZT8NCg0KWWVz ICAgWyBdDQpObyAgICBbIF0NCg0KUGxlYXNlIHJlc3BvbmQgYnkgQXVndXN0IDE4dGggb24gdGhl IE1MLg0KDQotQ2hhaXJzDQoNClBsZWFzZSBzZWUgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYXQgdGhlIElFVEY4 MSBXRyBtZWV0aW5nIG9uIHRoaXMgdG9waWMgYXQ6DQpodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2Nl ZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0ZXMvbmV0ZXh0LnR4dA0KDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpuZXRleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpuZXRleHRAaWV0 Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0DQpfX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdA0KbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xp c3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dA0KDQoNCg0KLS0gDQpJTUFSQSBUZWFtLCBJTlJJQSwgRnJhbmNlLiANCkpv bmctSHlvdWsgTGVlLCBsaXZpbmcgc29tZXdoZXJlIGJldHdlZW4gL2Rldi9udWxsIGFuZCAvZGV2 L3JhbmRvbS4NCg0KI2VtYWlsOiBodXJyeW9uIChhdCkgZ21haWwgKGRvdCkgY29tIHx8IGpvbmct aHlvdWsubGVlIChhdCkgaW5yaWEgKGRvdCkgZnINCiN3ZWJwYWdlOiBodHRwczovL3NpdGVzLmdv b2dsZS5jb20vc2l0ZS9odXJyeW9uLw0KDQo= --=_alternative 0043CF2D482578EE_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPkhlbGxvIExlZSw8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8 YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPk1hbnkgdGhhbmtzIGZvciB5b3VyIHN1 cHBvcnQuIEkgd2lsbA0KcmVhZCB0aGUgcmVmZXJlbmNlIG1hdGVyaWFscyB5b3UgcHJvdmlkZS4g UmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBjb21tZW50LCBJIHdpbGwNCmRldGFpbHMgdGhlIHVzZSBjYXNlIGluIHRo ZSBmdXR1cmUgdmVyc2lvbi48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNh bnMtc2VyaWYiPkJlc3QgUmVnYXJkcyw8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNh bnMtc2VyaWYiPkpveTwvZm9udD4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjx0YWJsZSB3aWR0aD0xMDAl Pg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQgd2lkdGg9MzUlPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5z LXNlcmlmIj48Yj5Kb25nLUh5b3VrIExlZSAmbHQ7am9uZy1oeW91ay5sZWVAaW5yaWEuZnImZ3Q7 PC9iPg0KPC9mb250Pg0KPHA+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjIwMTEtMDgt MTEgz8LO5yAwOTo1MDwvZm9udD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD02NCU+DQo8dGFibGUgd2lkdGg9MTAwJT4N Cjx0ciB2YWxpZ249dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPGRpdiBhbGlnbj1yaWdodD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFj ZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+ytW8/sjLPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRkPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNl PSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj56aG91Lnhpbmd5dWVAenRlLmNvbS5jbjwvZm9udD4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249 dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPGRpdiBhbGlnbj1yaWdodD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJp ZiI+s63LzTwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjx0ZD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+ RGlyay52b24tSHVnb0B0ZWxla29tLmRlLCBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9raWEuY29tLA0KbmV0 ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnPC9mb250Pg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJp Z2h0Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj7W98ziPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRk Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5SZTogW25ldGV4dF0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIGNh bGw6IFdvcmsgb24NCnNwZWNpZnlpbmcgcHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5IE1vYmls ZSBJUHY2PzwvZm9udD48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlPg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8 dGQ+DQo8dGQ+PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNp emU9Mz5RMTogWWVzLjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTM+UTI6IFllcy48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8 YnI+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0zPkNvbW1lbnRzOiBBcyBwb2ludGVkLCB0aGUgdXNlIGNhc2Vz IHNob3VsZCBiZSBwcm92aWRlZA0KYW5kIHBlcnNvbmFsbHkgSSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIGludHJv ZHVjZSB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGFydGljbGVzIHJlY2VudGx5DQpwdWJsaXNoZWQ6PC9mb250Pg0K PGJyPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9Mz4xLiZuYnNwO0xpZ2h0d2VpZ2h0IE5FdHdvcmsgTU9iaWxp dHkgd2l0aGluIFBNSVB2NiBmb3INClRyYW5zcG9ydGF0aW9uIFN5c3RlbXMmcXVvdDssIElFRUUg U3lzdGVtcyBKb3VybmFsOiZuYnNwOzwvZm9udD48YSBocmVmPWh0dHA6Ly9keC5kb2kub3JnLzEw LjExMDkvSlNZU1QuMjAxMS4yMTU4NjgxPjxmb250IHNpemU9MyBjb2xvcj1ibHVlPjx1Pmh0dHA6 Ly9keC5kb2kub3JnLzEwLjExMDkvSlNZU1QuMjAxMS4yMTU4NjgxPC91PjwvZm9udD48L2E+DQo8 YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0zPjIuJm5ic3A7UGVyZm9ybWFuY2UgQW5hbHlzaXMgb2YgUE1JUHY2IGJh c2VkIE5FdHdvcmsgTU9iaWxpdHkNCmZvciBJbnRlbGxpZ2VudCBUcmFuc3BvcnRhdGlvbiBTeXN0 ZW1zJnF1b3Q7LCBJRUVFIFRyYW5zYWN0aW9ucyBvbiBWZWhpY3VsYXINClRlY2hub2xvZ3k6Jm5i c3A7PC9mb250PjxhIGhyZWY9aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTEwOS9UVlQuMjAxMS4yMTU3 OTQ5Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MyBjb2xvcj1ibHVlPjx1Pmh0dHA6Ly9keC5kb2kub3JnLzEwLjExMDkv VFZULjIwMTEuMjE1Nzk0OTwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9hPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9Mz5D aGVlcnMuPGJyPg0KPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9Mz5PbiBUaHUsIEF1ZyAxMSwgMjAx MSBhdCAyOjA4IFBNLCAmbHQ7PC9mb250PjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpEaXJrLnZvbi1IdWdvQHRl bGVrb20uZGUiPjxmb250IHNpemU9MyBjb2xvcj1ibHVlPjx1PkRpcmsudm9uLUh1Z29AdGVsZWtv bS5kZTwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9hPjxmb250IHNpemU9Mz4mZ3Q7DQp3cm90ZTo8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+ PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0zPlExOiBZZXM8YnI+DQpRMjogWWVzPGJyPg0KQ29tbWVudDogcGxlYXNlIHBy b3ZpZGUgbW9yZSBkZXRhaWxzIG9uIHRoZSB1c2UgY2FzZSBpbiBXRyBJLUQsIGUuZy4gdGhlDQpw aHJhc2U8YnI+DQonSXQgYXNzdW1lcyB0aGF0IGEgTVIgW2kuZS4gTW9iaWxlIFJvdXRlcl0gaXMg YSByZWd1bGFyIElQdjYgcm91dGVyIHdpdGhvdXQNCmV4dGVuc2lvbiBmb3IgbW9iaWxpdHkgbWFu YWdlbWVudHMuJyBzb3VuZHMgYSBiaXQgc3RyYW5nZSB0byBtZSAuLi48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpUaGFu a3MhPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KUmVnYXJkczxicj4NCkRpcms8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0z Pjxicj4NCjxicj4NCltuZXRleHRdIENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBXb3JrIG9uIHNwZWNpZnlpbmcg cHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5DQpNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj88YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8L2Zv bnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0zPkF0IElFVEY4MSwgQ2FybCBXaWxsaWFtcyBwcmVzZW50ZWQg dGhlIEktRDogJnF1b3Q7UHJlZml4DQpEZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvcjxicj4NClByb3h5IE1vYmlsZSBJ UHY2JnF1b3Q7ICZsdDtkcmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1wZC1wbWlwLTAxLnR4dCZndDs8YnI+DQo8 YnI+DQpHZW5lcmFsIGNvbnNlbnN1cyBhdCB0aGUgTmV0ZXh0IFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgd2FzIHRoYXQg cHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb248YnI+DQppcyBhIHJlcXVpcmVkIGZlYXR1cmUgZm9yIFBNSVA2LiBX ZSBnYXVnZWQgdGhlIGludGVyZXN0IGluIHRoZSByb29tIHRvPGJyPg0KYWRvcHQgdGhpcyBJLUQg YXMgdGhlIHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IG9mIGEgV0cgSS1EIGZvciB0aGUgUEQgZmVhdHVyZTxicj4N CmFuZCBvYnNlcnZlZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nOjxicj4NCjxicj4NCiZxdW90Ozxicj4NCkNoYWly czogaG93IG1hbnkgcGVvcGxlIHRoaW5rIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtIGlzIHJlbGV2YW50OiAxOTxicj4N CkhvdyBtYW55IGhhdmUgcmVhZCBpdDogNzxicj4NCkhvdyBtYW55IHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgdGhlIHBy b3Bvc2VkIHNvbHV0aW9uIGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdCBjYW4gYmUgc3RhcnRpbmc8YnI+DQpwb2ludCB0 byB3b3JrIG9uIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtPzxicj4NCkluIGZhdm9yOiA3IDsgJm5ic3A7T3Bwb3NlZDog MTxicj4NCiZxdW90Ozxicj4NCjxicj4NCldlIGFyZSBub3cgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIHdpdGggdGhl IHF1ZXN0aW9ucyBvbiB0aGUgTUwuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KUXVlc3Rpb24gdG8gV0c6PGJyPg0KPGJy Pg0KMS4gU2hvdWxkIHRoZSBXRyBzcGVjaWZ5IHByZWZpeC1kZWxlZ2F0aW9uIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9y IFBNSVA2Pzxicj4NCjxicj4NClllcyAmbmJzcDsgWyBdPGJyPg0KTm8gJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO1sg XTxicj4NCjxicj4NCjIuIENhbiB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBXRyBkb2N1bWVudCB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24g cHJvcG9zZWQgaW4gSS1EOjxicj4NCmRyYWZ0LXpob3UtbmV0ZXh0LXBkLXBtaXAtMDEudHh0IGFz IHRoZSBzdGFydGluZyBwb2ludCBvZiB0aGlzPGJyPg0KZmVhdHVyZT88YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpZZXMg Jm5ic3A7IFsgXTxicj4NCk5vICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtbIF08YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpQbGVhc2UgcmVz cG9uZCBieSBBdWd1c3QgMTh0aCBvbiB0aGUgTUwuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KLUNoYWlyczxicj4NCjxi cj4NClBsZWFzZSBzZWUgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYXQgdGhlIElFVEY4MSBXRyBtZWV0aW5nIG9u IHRoaXMgdG9waWMgYXQ6PC9mb250Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MyBjb2xvcj1ibHVlPjx1Pjxicj4NCjwv dT48L2ZvbnQ+PGEgaHJlZj1odHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzgxL21pbnV0 ZXMvbmV0ZXh0LnR4dCB0YXJnZXQ9X2JsYW5rPjxmb250IHNpemU9MyBjb2xvcj1ibHVlPjx1Pmh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MvODEvbWludXRlcy9uZXRleHQudHh0PC91Pjwv Zm9udD48L2E+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0zPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDwv Zm9udD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTMgY29sb3I9Ymx1ZT48dT48YnI+DQo8L3U+PC9mb250PjxhIGhyZWY9 bWFpbHRvOm5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZz48Zm9udCBzaXplPTMgY29sb3I9Ymx1ZT48dT5uZXRleHRA aWV0Zi5vcmc8L3U+PC9mb250PjwvYT48Zm9udCBzaXplPTMgY29sb3I9Ymx1ZT48dT48YnI+DQo8 L3U+PC9mb250PjxhIGhyZWY9aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9u ZXRleHQgdGFyZ2V0PV9ibGFuaz48Zm9udCBzaXplPTMgY29sb3I9Ymx1ZT48dT5odHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dDwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9hPjxmb250IHNp emU9Mz48YnI+DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f Xzxicj4NCm5ldGV4dCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Q8L2ZvbnQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0zIGNvbG9yPWJsdWU+ PHU+PGJyPg0KPC91PjwvZm9udD48YSBocmVmPW1haWx0bzpuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmc+PGZvbnQg c2l6ZT0zIGNvbG9yPWJsdWU+PHU+bmV0ZXh0QGlldGYub3JnPC91PjwvZm9udD48L2E+PGZvbnQg c2l6ZT0zIGNvbG9yPWJsdWU+PHU+PGJyPg0KPC91PjwvZm9udD48YSBocmVmPWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbmV0ZXh0IHRhcmdldD1fYmxhbms+PGZvbnQgc2l6 ZT0zIGNvbG9yPWJsdWU+PHU+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9u ZXRleHQ8L3U+PC9mb250PjwvYT4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTM+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0K LS0gPGJyPg0KSU1BUkEgVGVhbSwgSU5SSUEsIEZyYW5jZS4gPGJyPg0KSm9uZy1IeW91ayBMZWUs IGxpdmluZyBzb21ld2hlcmUgYmV0d2VlbiAvZGV2L251bGwgYW5kIC9kZXYvcmFuZG9tLjxicj4N Cjxicj4NCiNlbWFpbDogaHVycnlvbiAoYXQpIGdtYWlsIChkb3QpIGNvbSB8fCBqb25nLWh5b3Vr LmxlZSAoYXQpIGlucmlhIChkb3QpDQpmcjxicj4NCiN3ZWJwYWdlOiA8L2ZvbnQ+PGEgaHJlZj1o dHRwczovL3NpdGVzLmdvb2dsZS5jb20vc2l0ZS9odXJyeW9uLyB0YXJnZXQ9X2JsYW5rPjxmb250 IHNpemU9MyBjb2xvcj1ibHVlPjx1Pmh0dHBzOi8vc2l0ZXMuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS9zaXRlL2h1cnJ5 b24vPC91PjwvZm9udD48L2E+DQo8YnI+DQo= --=_alternative 0043CF2D482578EE_=-- From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Tue Aug 16 08:16:42 2011 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 7BBC721F8BB7 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:16:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.226, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_AVOID=2.3, 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 3NrcgYDrVVRR for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:16:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BFCD11E8085 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7GFH9ml003347 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:17:28 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:16:56 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.58) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:16:56 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-025.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.5.124]) by 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.58]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:16:56 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: LMA initiated flow mobility scenario in I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob Thread-Index: AQHMXCeI4KodSZYTPEqA8A8VWvP+JA== Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:16:55 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.28] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2011 15:16:56.0695 (UTC) FILETIME=[897B7070:01CC5C27] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] LMA initiated flow mobility scenario in I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob 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, 16 Aug 2011 15:16:42 -0000 Hello, One of the issues that has been raised (by Julien) is about the capability that allows an LMA to initiate flow switching. The I-D states: " A second possible scenario is the following. A multi-interfaced mobile node is attached to a PMIPv6-Domain and the LMA, at a given moment, decides to move a flow. The LMA can decide to move a flow as a result of a policy change or upon receiving a trigger either based on network status or based on an event detected at the mobile node and transported via old or new MAG. How this decision is taken is out of scope of this specification. " One of the possible consequences of such an action would be packets being sent into a void because the MN may be no longer attached to that MAG through the specific interface. There has not been a good solution that has been presented to the WG. This issue has been considered as being a fundamental flaw. In view of the criticality of this flaw, I would recommend that the LMA initiated flow mobility capability be removed from the I-D prior to it being accepted as the WG doc. If WG members feel strongly about having this feature, it can be included at a later time when a reasonable solution to address the above concern has been presented and accepted. -Raj From julien.ietf@gmail.com Tue Aug 16 08:26:29 2011 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 18F9211E809F for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:26:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_AVOID=2.3, 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 qTDWbA-OrtTw for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:26:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6014C11E809B for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:26:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so14430wyg.31 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=o3LqF9MEP+px4JKPPfOdN3YSEfWI7hGht/bINrbl+c8=; b=fwF8FZprMPNBw4My2tYixSd/wHXazAYdq6Fk7l/E2hKjjamkcLvDnAV7ZfLhSXZRNd qWXytE7BpU/l/v/2nNo9Q5DCQbmko/Zmp6waCFMlIC/FRw3T8jLRN1i1iUZJjvc7rqg+ mDDYPnxMk3t7Y/NnuzfICIbZOvNT9F2Mr4mo0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.11.141 with SMTP id t13mr4602129wbt.36.1313508433874; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.5.133 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:27:13 -0700 Message-ID: From: Julien Laganier To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] LMA initiated flow mobility scenario in I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob 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, 16 Aug 2011 15:26:29 -0000 Hi Raj, On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:16 AM, wrote: > > Hello, > > One of the issues that has been raised (by Julien) is about the capabilit= y > that allows an LMA to initiate flow switching. > The I-D states: > " > =A0 A second possible scenario is the following. =A0A multi-interfaced > =A0 mobile node is attached to a PMIPv6-Domain and the LMA, at a given > =A0 moment, decides to move a flow. =A0The LMA can decide to move a flow = as > =A0 a result of a policy change or upon receiving a trigger either based > =A0 on network status or based on an event detected at the mobile node > =A0 and transported via old or new MAG. =A0How this decision is taken is > =A0 out of scope of this specification. > > " > > One of the possible consequences of such an action would be packets being > sent into a void because the MN may be no longer attached to that MAG > through the specific interface. There has not been a good solution that > has been presented to the WG. This issue has been considered as being a > fundamental flaw. > > In view of the criticality of this flaw, I would recommend that the LMA > initiated flow mobility capability be removed from the I-D prior to it > being accepted as the WG doc. If WG members feel strongly about having > this feature, it can be included at a later time when a reasonable > solution to address the above concern has been presented and accepted. I support this approach. Thanks, --julien From sfaccin@rim.com Tue Aug 16 11:13:50 2011 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 AAE4921F8BEE for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:13:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_AVOID=2.3, 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 UMjQGQa7YJxv for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mhs061cnc.rim.net (mhs061cnc.rim.net [208.65.73.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE66A21F8BEC for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:13:49 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 0a412830-b7b0aae000007e14-2e-4e4ab3856ad4 Received: from XHT106CNC.rim.net (xht106cnc.rim.net [10.65.22.53]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mhs061cnc.rim.net (SBG) with SMTP id CA.5F.32276.583BA4E4; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:14:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from XCT101ADS.rim.net (10.67.111.42) by XHT106CNC.rim.net (10.65.22.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.159.2; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 14:14:37 -0400 Received: from XMB101ADS.rim.net ([fe80::cce5:67de:a150:3c3b]) by XCT101ADS.rim.net ([fe80::2c7e:1215:d554:35b5%20]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:14:36 -0500 From: Stefano Faccin To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [netext] LMA initiated flow mobility scenario in I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob Thread-Index: AQHMXCeI4KodSZYTPEqA8A8VWvP+JJUfyEog Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:14:35 +0000 Message-ID: <00151E171043D44DBF23C55EEAB45ED001903F@XMB101ADS.rim.net> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.70.110.254] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" content-transfer-encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrEKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXC5Shmqtu62cvPYP5uSYuW9d1sFtd+PmV3 YPJYsuQnk8fdW5eYApiiGhhtEvPy8ksSS1IVUlKLk22VfFLTE3MUAooyyxKTKxVcMouTcxIz c1OLlBQyU2yVTJQUCnISk1NzU/NKbJUSCwpS81KU7LgUMIANUFlmnkJqXnJ+SmZeuq2SZ7C/ roWFqaWuoZKdLhJI+MedceriEeaCDvGKGwuPMTUw7hHrYuTkkBAwkfh4cw4jhC0mceHeejYQ W0igh0li7Q9jCHspo8Sjk9FdjFxA9lZGiWcLJzODJNgE1CSWPF8LZosIJEncebUNzBYWyJTY 9XY3VDxL4uKPKSwQtpHE1HcTwRawCKhKXPj9nwnE5hVwk9i0fiY7xDIzibVfX4DZnALmEluu ngDrZRSQldh99jpYPbOAuMStJ/OZII4WkFiy5zwzhC0q8fLxP9YuRg4gW1Hi9ek6EJNZQFNi /S59iE5FiSndD9khtgpKnJz5hAViq4zExMeLWSYwis9CsmAWQvcsJN2zkHQvYGRZxSiYm1Fs YGaYnJesV5SZq5eXWrKJEZw4NAx2ME7Yq3WIUYCDUYmH9+UaLz8h1sSy4srcQ4wSHMxKIryM aUAh3pTEyqrUovz4otKc1OJDjBbA4JnILMWdnA9Mankl8cYGBigcJXHeMGkDPyGBdGCKyk5N LUgtgmll4uCUamDMYAlt3V4nY/n7aKMWZ/a3D6w7rPx5f97zsqjie7RsrkNg8anZsiKfQm4k Jfz6wzT92xMl4bfu0wvu7jl6fn3e1PO9Lt0OwgeWzvXbKNfVJMx7a+vRPp9PXK9vz5uUsKRB J8V5xda1Qs03Z33llz8vFSUbs18ia4lxMOuEM9LcFw1XW+xLTJmkxFKckWioxVxUnAgAHgtf WTUDAAA= Subject: Re: [netext] LMA initiated flow mobility scenario in I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob 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, 16 Aug 2011 18:13:50 -0000 UmFqLA0KVGhpcyBzb3VuZHMgbGlrZSBhIHNlbnNpYmxlIGFwcHJvYWNoIGFuZCBJIGZ1bGx5 IHN1cHBvcnQgaXQuDQpDaGVlcnMsDQpTdGVmYW5vIEZhY2Npbg0KDQpTdGFuZGFyZHMgTWFu YWdlcg0KUmVzZWFyY2ggSW4gTW90aW9uIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uIA0KNTAwMCBSaXZlcnNpZGUg RHJpdmUgDQpCdWlsZGluZyA2LCBCcmF6b3MgRWFzdCwgU3RlLiAxMDANCklydmluZywgVGV4 YXMgNzUwMzkgVVNBIA0KTm90ZTogbG9jYXRlZCBpbiBQU1QNCg0KT2ZmaWNlOiAoOTcyKSA5 MTAgMzQ1McKgIA0KSW50ZXJuYWw6IDgyMC42MzQ1MQ0KTW9iaWxlIDogKDUxMCkgMjMwIDg0 MjINCnd3dy5yaW0uY29tOyB3d3cuYmxhY2tiZXJyeS5jb20gDQoNCg0KDQrvgZAgQ29uc2lk ZXIgdGhlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IGJlZm9yZSBwcmludGluZy4NCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBN ZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IG5ldGV4dC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86bmV0 ZXh0LWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBCYXNhdmFyYWouUGF0aWxAbm9r aWEuY29tDQpTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCBBdWd1c3QgMTYsIDIwMTEgODoxNyBBTQ0KVG86IG5l dGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KU3ViamVjdDogW25ldGV4dF0gTE1BIGluaXRpYXRlZCBmbG93IG1v YmlsaXR5IHNjZW5hcmlvIGluIEktRCBkcmFmdC1iZXJuYXJkb3MtbmV0ZXh0LXBtaXB2Ni1m bG93bW9iDQoNCg0KSGVsbG8sDQoNCk9uZSBvZiB0aGUgaXNzdWVzIHRoYXQgaGFzIGJlZW4g cmFpc2VkIChieSBKdWxpZW4pIGlzIGFib3V0IHRoZSBjYXBhYmlsaXR5DQp0aGF0IGFsbG93 cyBhbiBMTUEgdG8gaW5pdGlhdGUgZmxvdyBzd2l0Y2hpbmcuDQpUaGUgSS1EIHN0YXRlczoN CiINCiAgIEEgc2Vjb25kIHBvc3NpYmxlIHNjZW5hcmlvIGlzIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcuICBB IG11bHRpLWludGVyZmFjZWQNCiAgIG1vYmlsZSBub2RlIGlzIGF0dGFjaGVkIHRvIGEgUE1J UHY2LURvbWFpbiBhbmQgdGhlIExNQSwgYXQgYSBnaXZlbg0KICAgbW9tZW50LCBkZWNpZGVz IHRvIG1vdmUgYSBmbG93LiAgVGhlIExNQSBjYW4gZGVjaWRlIHRvIG1vdmUgYSBmbG93IGFz DQogICBhIHJlc3VsdCBvZiBhIHBvbGljeSBjaGFuZ2Ugb3IgdXBvbiByZWNlaXZpbmcgYSB0 cmlnZ2VyIGVpdGhlciBiYXNlZA0KICAgb24gbmV0d29yayBzdGF0dXMgb3IgYmFzZWQgb24g YW4gZXZlbnQgZGV0ZWN0ZWQgYXQgdGhlIG1vYmlsZSBub2RlDQogICBhbmQgdHJhbnNwb3J0 ZWQgdmlhIG9sZCBvciBuZXcgTUFHLiAgSG93IHRoaXMgZGVjaXNpb24gaXMgdGFrZW4gaXMN CiAgIG91dCBvZiBzY29wZSBvZiB0aGlzIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24uDQoNCiINCg0KT25lIG9m IHRoZSBwb3NzaWJsZSBjb25zZXF1ZW5jZXMgb2Ygc3VjaCBhbiBhY3Rpb24gd291bGQgYmUg cGFja2V0cyBiZWluZw0Kc2VudCBpbnRvIGEgdm9pZCBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSBNTiBtYXkgYmUg bm8gbG9uZ2VyIGF0dGFjaGVkIHRvIHRoYXQgTUFHDQp0aHJvdWdoIHRoZSBzcGVjaWZpYyBp bnRlcmZhY2UuIFRoZXJlIGhhcyBub3QgYmVlbiBhIGdvb2Qgc29sdXRpb24gdGhhdA0KaGFz IGJlZW4gcHJlc2VudGVkIHRvIHRoZSBXRy4gVGhpcyBpc3N1ZSBoYXMgYmVlbiBjb25zaWRl cmVkIGFzIGJlaW5nIGENCmZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIGZsYXcuDQoNCkluIHZpZXcgb2YgdGhlIGNy aXRpY2FsaXR5IG9mIHRoaXMgZmxhdywgSSB3b3VsZCByZWNvbW1lbmQgdGhhdCB0aGUgTE1B DQppbml0aWF0ZWQgZmxvdyBtb2JpbGl0eSBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IGJlIHJlbW92ZWQgZnJvbSB0 aGUgSS1EIHByaW9yIHRvIGl0DQpiZWluZyBhY2NlcHRlZCBhcyB0aGUgV0cgZG9jLiBJZiBX RyBtZW1iZXJzIGZlZWwgc3Ryb25nbHkgYWJvdXQgaGF2aW5nDQp0aGlzIGZlYXR1cmUsIGl0 IGNhbiBiZSBpbmNsdWRlZCBhdCBhIGxhdGVyIHRpbWUgd2hlbiBhIHJlYXNvbmFibGUNCnNv bHV0aW9uIHRvIGFkZHJlc3MgdGhlIGFib3ZlIGNvbmNlcm4gaGFzIGJlZW4gcHJlc2VudGVk IGFuZCBhY2NlcHRlZC4NCg0KLVJhag0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KbmV0ZXh0QGlldGYu b3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL25ldGV4dA0KDQot LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NClRoaXMgdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIChpbmNsdWRpbmcgYW55IGF0dGFj aG1lbnRzKSBtYXkgY29udGFpbiBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24sIHByaXZpbGVn ZWQgbWF0ZXJpYWwgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBtYXRlcmlhbCBwcm90ZWN0ZWQgYnkgdGhlIHNvbGlj aXRvci1jbGllbnQgb3Igb3RoZXIgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBwcml2aWxlZ2VzKSwgb3IgY29uc3Rp dHV0ZSBub24tcHVibGljIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBBbnkgdXNlIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gYnkgYW55b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4gdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCBpcyBwcm9o aWJpdGVkLiBJZiB5b3UgaGF2ZSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBpbiBlcnJv ciwgcGxlYXNlIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBzZW5kZXIgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZSB0 aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0uIFVzZSwgZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiwg ZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBvciByZXByb2R1Y3Rpb24gb2YgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gYnkg dW5pbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnRzIGlzIG5vdCBhdXRob3JpemVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5s YXdmdWwuDQo= From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Aug 17 00:05:46 2011 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 C0B2011E80A9; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:05:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.553 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.046, 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 m3GXGfYVCHhv; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BDCB11E8092; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:05:46 -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: 3.58 Message-ID: <20110817070546.28345.91029.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:05:46 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-radius-pmip6-04.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, 17 Aug 2011 07:05:46 -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 : RADIUS Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Author(s) : Frank Xia Behcet Sarikaya Jouni Korhonen Sri Gundavelli Damjan Damic Filename : draft-ietf-netext-radius-pmip6-04.txt Pages : 33 Date : 2011-08-17 This document defines new attributes to facilitate Proxy Mobile IPv6 operations using the RADIUS infrastructure. The RADIUS interactions between the mobile access gateway and the RADIUS-based AAA server take place when the Mobile Node attaches, authenticates and authorizes to a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Furthermore, this document defines the RADIUS-based interface between the local mobility anchor and the AAA RADIUS server for authorizing received Proxy Binding Update messages for the mobile node's mobility session. In addition to the mobility session setup related interactions, this document defines the baseline for the mobile access gateway and the local mobility anchor generated accounting. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-radius-pmip6-04.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-radius-pmip6-04.txt From jonne.soininen@renesasmobile.com Wed Aug 17 04:01:03 2011 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 331CC21F8B2A for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:01:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.323 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.323 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.928, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, 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 rlK-oCIdu6gG for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail27.messagelabs.com (mail27.messagelabs.com [193.109.254.147]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E05721F8AFB for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:00:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Env-Sender: jonne.soininen@renesasmobile.com X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-27.messagelabs.com!1313578897!45148097!1 X-Originating-IP: [213.174.82.10] X-StarScan-Version: 6.3.6; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 29132 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2011 11:01:38 -0000 Received: from renexfe01.roe2.renesasmobile.com (HELO renexfe01.roe2.renesasmobile.com) (213.174.82.10) by server-15.tower-27.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 17 Aug 2011 11:01:38 -0000 Received: from RENEXMB02.roe2.renesasmobile.com ([fe80::b101:43e1:dd7b:2fbb]) by renexfe01.roe2.renesasmobile.com ([fe80::ec94:bbb3:68e:a94a%18]) with mapi id 14.01.0255.000; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 14:01:43 +0300 From: To: , , Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMXM0LZrI505ce4EaH/FTGDeHhVQ== Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 11:01:42 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, da-DK Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.21.22.233] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CA717A1D4FE5Bjonnesoininenrenesasmobilecom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 17 Aug 2011 11:01:03 -0000 --_000_CA717A1D4FE5Bjonnesoininenrenesasmobilecom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGksDQoNCkxpa2UgSSBzYWlkIGR1cmluZyB0aGUgbWVldGluZywgSSB2b3RlIHllcyBvbiBib3Ro IHF1ZXN0aW9ucy4NCg0KQ2hlZXJzLA0KDQpKb25uZS4NCi0tDQpKb25uZSBTb2luaW5lbg0KUmVu ZXNhcyBNb2JpbGUNCg0KVGVsOiArMzU4IDQwIDUyNyA0NjM0DQpFLW1haWw6IGpvbm5lLnNvaW5p bmVuQHJlbmVzYXNtb2JpbGUuY29tDQoNCg0KRnJvbTogwu3m5yA8dGh1bWF4OUBnbWFpbC5jb208 bWFpbHRvOnRodW1heDlAZ21haWwuY29tPj4NCkRhdGU6IEZyaSwgMTIgQXVnIDIwMTEgMTM6MzM6 MTYgKzA4MDANClRvOiA8QmFzYXZhcmFqLlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86QmFzYXZhcmFq LlBhdGlsQG5va2lhLmNvbT4+LCBuZXRleHQgPG5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86bmV0ZXh0 QGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbbmV0ZXh0XSBDb25zZW5zdXMgY2FsbDogV29yayBv biBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHByZWZpeCBkZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvciBQcm94eSBNb2JpbGUgSVB2Nj8NCg0K UTEuIFllcw0KUTIuIFllcw0KDQpCZXN0IFJlZ2FyZHMsDQpYaWFvIE1hDQoNCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0NCkF0IElFVEY4MSwgQ2FybCBXaWxsaWFtcyBwcmVzZW50ZWQgdGhlIEktRDogIlByZWZp eCBEZWxlZ2F0aW9uIGZvcg0KUHJveHkgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYiIDxkcmFmdC16aG91LW5ldGV4dC1w ZC1wbWlwLTAxLnR4dD4NCg0KR2VuZXJhbCBjb25zZW5zdXMgYXQgdGhlIE5ldGV4dCBXRyBtZWV0 aW5nIHdhcyB0aGF0IHByZWZpeCBkZWxlZ2F0aW9uDQppcyBhIHJlcXVpcmVkIGZlYXR1cmUgZm9y IFBNSVA2LiBXZSBnYXVnZWQgdGhlIGludGVyZXN0IGluIHRoZSByb29tIHRvDQphZG9wdCB0aGlz IEktRCBhcyB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQgb2YgYSBXRyBJLUQgZm9yIHRoZSBQRCBmZWF0dXJl DQphbmQgb2JzZXJ2ZWQgdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZzoNCg0KIg0KQ2hhaXJzOiBob3cgbWFueSBwZW9w bGUgdGhpbmsgdGhlIHByb2JsZW0gaXMgcmVsZXZhbnQ6IDE5DQpIb3cgbWFueSBoYXZlIHJlYWQg aXQ6IDcNCkhvdyBtYW55IHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgdGhlIHByb3Bvc2VkIHNvbHV0aW9uIGluIHRoZSBk cmFmdCBjYW4gYmUgc3RhcnRpbmcNCnBvaW50IHRvIHdvcmsgb24gdGhlIHByb2JsZW0/DQpJbiBm YXZvcjogNyA7ICBPcHBvc2VkOiAxDQoiDQoNCldlIGFyZSBub3cgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIHdpdGgg dGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9ucyBvbiB0aGUgTUwuDQoNClF1ZXN0aW9uIHRvIFdHOg0KDQoxLiBTaG91bGQg dGhlIFdHIHNwZWNpZnkgcHJlZml4LWRlbGVnYXRpb24gc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgUE1JUDY/DQoNClll cyAgIFsgXQ0KTm8gICAgWyBdDQoNCjIuIENhbiB3ZSBhZG9wdCBhcyBXRyBkb2N1bWVudCB0aGUg c29sdXRpb24gcHJvcG9zZWQgaW4gSS1EOg0KZHJhZnQtemhvdS1uZXRleHQtcGQtcG1pcC0wMS50 eHQgYXMgdGhlIHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IG9mIHRoaXMNCmZlYXR1cmU/DQoNClllcyAgIFsgXQ0K Tm8gICAgWyBdDQoNClBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIGJ5IEF1Z3VzdCAxOHRoIG9uIHRoZSBNTC4NCg0K LUNoYWlycw0KDQpQbGVhc2Ugc2VlIHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGODEgV0cgbWVl dGluZyBvbiB0aGlzIHRvcGljIGF0Og0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9wcm9jZWVkaW5ncy84 MS9taW51dGVzL25ldGV4dC50eHQNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX18gbmV0ZXh0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBuZXRleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRv Om5ldGV4dEBpZXRmLm9yZz4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9u ZXRleHQNCg== --_000_CA717A1D4FE5Bjonnesoininenrenesasmobilecom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

Like I said during the meeting, I vote yes on both questions.

Cheers,

Jonne.
-- 
Jonne Soininen
Renesas Mobile

Tel: +358 40 527 4634
E-mail: jonne.soininen@renesasmobile.com


From: =C2=ED=E6=E7 <thumax9@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:33:16 = 3;0800
To: <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com>, netext <netext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus cal= l: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?

Q1. Yes
Q2. Yes

Best Regards,
Xiao Ma

------------------= -------------------------------------------------------
At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I= -D: "Prefix Delegation for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ;  Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt

_______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
--_000_CA717A1D4FE5Bjonnesoininenrenesasmobilecom_-- From jong-hyouk.lee@inria.fr Wed Aug 17 04:32:17 2011 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 379E921F8772 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:32:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.193 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.193 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.433, BAYES_40=-0.185, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 NNIgNkCHAroC for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:32:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F9821F8785 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:32:15 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,239,1312149600"; d="scan'208,217";a="116073788" Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com ([209.85.220.172]) by mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 17 Aug 2011 13:33:03 +0200 Received: by vxi29 with SMTP id 29so918964vxi.31 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.19.204 with SMTP id h12mr963210vde.54.1313580782265; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:33:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.112.5 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 04:32:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jong-Hyouk Lee Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:32:42 +0200 Message-ID: To: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307d0000e9246a04aab1db70 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiBSZTogIENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBXb3Jr?= =?utf-8?q?_on_specifying_prefix_delegation_for_Proxy_Mobile_IPv6?= =?utf-8?q?=3F?= 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, 17 Aug 2011 11:32:17 -0000 --20cf307d0000e9246a04aab1db70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Good; Since a prefix delegation for PMIPv6 is an item I'm also considering to work, let me know if you need any support. Cheers. 2011/8/16 > > Hello Lee, > Many thanks for your support. I will read the reference materials you > provide. Regarding the comment, I will details the use case in the future > version. > > Best Regards, > Joy > > > *Jong-Hyouk Lee * > > 2011-08-11 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=88 09:50 > =E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA > zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn > =E6=8A=84=E9=80=81 > Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org > =E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98 > Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Pro= xy > Mobile IPv6? > > > > > Q1: Yes. > Q2: Yes. > > Comments: As pointed, the use cases should be provided and personally I > would like to introduce the following articles recently published: > > 1. Lightweight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems"= , > IEEE Systems Journal: *http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681* > 2. Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork MObility for Intelligent > Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology: * > http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949* > > Cheers. > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM, <*Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de*> > wrote: > Q1: Yes > Q2: Yes > Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the > phrase > 'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router witho= ut > extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ... > > Thanks! > > Regards > Dirk > > > [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? > > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > and observed the following: > > " > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > How many have read it: 7 > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > point to work on the problem? > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > " > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:* > **http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt* > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list* > **netext@ietf.org* * > **https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext* > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list* > **netext@ietf.org* * > **https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext* > > > > -- > IMARA Team, INRIA, France. > Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. > > #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) f= r > #webpage: *https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/* > --=20 IMARA Team, INRIA, France. Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ --20cf307d0000e9246a04aab1db70 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Good; Since a prefix delegation for PMIPv6 is an item I'm also consider= ing to work, let me know if you need any support.

Cheers.

2011/8/16 <zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn>

Hello Lee,
Many thanks for your support. I wi= ll read the reference materials you provide. Regarding the comment, I will details the use case in the future version.

Best Regards,
Joy


Jong-Hyouk Lee &l= t;jong-hyouk.l= ee@inria.fr>

2011-08-11 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=88 09:50=

=E6=94=B6=E4=BB= =B6=E4=BA=BA
zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn
=E6=8A=84=E9=80= =81
Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.co= m, netext@ietf.org
=E4=B8=BB=E9=A2= =98
Re: [netext] Consensus call: = Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?





Q1: Yes.
Q2: Yes.

Comments: As pointed, the use cases should be provided and personally I would like to introduce the following articles recently published:

1.=C2=A0Lightweight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems", IEEE Systems Journal:=C2=A0http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681
2.=C2=A0Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork M= Obility for Intelligent Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicula= r Technology:=C2=A0http://dx.doi.org/= 10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949

Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM, <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> wrote:
Q1: Yes
Q2: Yes
Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the phrase
'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router wit= hout extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ...

Thanks!

Regards
Dirk


[netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Pref= ix Delegation for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ; =C2=A0Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes =C2=A0 [ ]
No =C2=A0 =C2=A0[ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes =C2=A0 [ ]
No =C2=A0 =C2=A0[ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:=
http://www.ietf.org/= proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt


_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman= /listinfo/netext
_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman= /listinfo/netext



--
IMARA Team, INRIA, France.
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random.

#email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/sit= e/hurryon/



--
IMARA Team,= INRIA, France.
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and = /dev/random.

#email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee = (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/
--20cf307d0000e9246a04aab1db70-- From cjbc@it.uc3m.es Wed Aug 17 19:45:29 2011 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 BBC505E8001 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 19:45:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 KkSTNFG+12MX for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 19:45:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp01.uc3m.es (smtp01.uc3m.es [163.117.176.131]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE2A21F8802 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 19:45:26 -0700 (PDT) X-uc3m-safe: yes Received: from [10.0.2.4] (modemcable093.1-80-70.mc.videotron.ca [70.80.1.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp01.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D8BFBA5899; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 04:46:16 +0200 (CEST) From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano To: netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-y9fgQL81EmrE1bE3tk1T" Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 04:46:13 +0200 Message-ID: <1313635573.19516.111.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-6.8.0.1017-18330.003 Cc: draft-ietf-netext-bulk-re-registration@tools.ietf.org Subject: [netext] Review of draft-ietf-netext-bulk-re-registration-04.txt 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: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 02:45:29 -0000 --=-y9fgQL81EmrE1bE3tk1T Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, As agreed during the last IETF meeting, I've performed a review of the draft. Overall, I think the document is in good shape and well written. I have some comments/question, and it might be that some of them have been already discussed on the ML (apologies if I missed that discussion). - Section 3.1: I think that the paragraph starting with "A mobile access gateway requests a bulk-registration..." should not appear there, as Section 3.2 deals specifically with that, so now it is a bit misleading/repetitive. It may lead the reader to believe that the MAG, after requesting to add an MN into a bulk re-registration set, it has to immediately send another PBU to set the binding. It becomes clear later in the doc that this is not the case, when I was reading that part it was not that clear to me. - Section 3.2.2: when the LMA decide to remove a single MN from its current bulk registration set, the LMA sends what is called "non-solicited regular PBAck message". Is that message used in any other spec? I think it is not a good idea to add unsolicited PBAcks, as it makes more complex the state machine of the implementation of the MAG. I think in the rest of the PMIPv6 extensions that are being developed in NETEXT, new messages have been preferred over overloading too much PBU/PBA or change its way operation significantly. It may be better to use instead a new message, like it is done in RFC 5846 with the BRI/BRA signaling. - Editorial. Section 3.2.3: "the bulk registration (B) flag set" --> "the bulk registration (B) flag set to 1". - Section 3.2.3: "Such PBU message lacks any options that identify" --> should we use some normative text there, like "Such PBU message MUST NOT include any options that identify"? - Editorial. Section 3.2.3, second paragraph: "mobile access gateway MUST" --> "The mobile access gateway MUST". - Section 3.2.3: In the last paragraph, I'd add some normative text there. - Editorial, Section 3.2.4, first paragraph: I think some rewriting is needed, because the "(a) in the expiration..." and "(b) on the termination..." does not seem completely right to me. - Editorial, Section 4.2: "The value of flag MUST NOT be set to the value of (1)" --> "The value of the flag MUST NOT be set to (1)". - Section 4.2: "All other fields in the Proxy Binding Acknowledgment message and the mobility options..." --> is that true? are not some additional restrictions on what options can go on the PBA, such any that refers to an individual MN? - Section 5.1: I think some non-normative text providing hints on what are the extensions/changes required to the BUL would help developers of the spec. It is true that it is not necessary to keep all the individual information of the bindings, but still some needs to be kept (for example the one that relates to the HNP(s) assigned to each MN). analogous comment for Section 5.2 for the LMA and the BC. - Editorial, Section 5.1.1: "to assigned" --> "to assign" - Editorial, Section 5.1.1, second bullet. I'd consider rewriting it a bit, it's a bit hard to read it. - Section 5,1.2: are the options listed there the only ones that cannot be included in the PBU? I think there are others that cannot either, such as the Mobile Node Link-layer Identifier Option, and I'm not sure about Handoff Indicator Option and Access Technology Type Option... - Editorial, Section 5.2.2, second bullet: "local mobility anchor must reject" --> "local mobility anchor MUST reject". - Editorial, Section 5.2.2, second bullet: I'd consider moving the last sentence ("The local mobility anchor MUST consider..." at the beginning of the bullet. - Editorial, Section 5.2.2, fourth bullet: "revocation request, expect making the scope" --> I think "expect" should be replaced with "except" - Section 6.2: does the RequestBulkReg..." config option force the MAG to add ALL MNs in a bulk registration set? I guess there might be cases in which that is not desired. Therefore, I'd consider changing the first "MUST" there to "MAY". - Section 6.2: "If the flag is set to a value of (0), the mobile access gateway MUST set the bulk registration flag (B) in the Proxy Binding Update request to a value of (1)" --> "If the flag is set to a value of (0), the mobile access gateway MUST set the bulk registration flag (B) in the Proxy Binding Update request to a value of (0)". - Reference to RFC3775 should be changed to the brand new and shinny RFC6275 :D - I'm not sure, so I leave this to native English speakers, but to me it sounds better "an MN" that "a MN". - Curiosity: where does the factor 4 come from in the expression of transactions/sec? Hope this helps, Carlos --=20 Carlos Jes=FAs Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/ GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67 --=-y9fgQL81EmrE1bE3tk1T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk5MfPUACgkQNdy6TdFwT2dtGACdErqYMoWCHBBdwcxWPqCQRCw0 D/YAoIq+xZWVV0fAR3300tMnx+aL3p/A =aeuo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-y9fgQL81EmrE1bE3tk1T-- From maxpassion@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 01:06:43 2011 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 8475121F8AC9 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:06:43 -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 ZvetbfBZXHaX for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC2821F874E for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:06:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye1 with SMTP id 1so3180172iye.27 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:07:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=joQoBFaZbkD0UpBb8Z7pdMvY9J2Ej0unxF4/yWonxOY=; b=QXEHiSs7P1pmmkbRVc4oChEKDPevEyaTwl84M7LDLIoMgM4P3NZn2DMSLn2h9vlWej 4C+WQiWIMNyzivSetdoTW0ow5jz0YJ6gxkqRcIlNIGi1z7ftEZYPq5MJGwFOmIJfRFgV LWI3R0gf5rpIoJWosxfNc9a1GXIBX1esgEFIo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.60.139 with SMTP id p11mr969016ibh.73.1313654848778; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:07:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.79.145 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:07:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:07:28 +0800 Message-ID: From: liu dapeng To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 08:06:43 -0000 1. YES 2. YES Best Regards, Dapeng Liu 2011/8/11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com : > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > and observed the following: > > " > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > How many have read it: 7 > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > point to work on the problem? > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > " > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > -- ------ Best Regards, Dapeng Liu From maxpassion@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 01:41:32 2011 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 875D821F8AE1 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:41:32 -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 iCEjDs3X8+Gf for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:41:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDD8721F8A64 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iye1 with SMTP id 1so3228927iye.27 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:42:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=hILIndj9gfAIxbeuSPHLPjcLYpc14OHUYxDOlVa2yqA=; b=QqwQ7a0YH+3ywzaPB2pt0iQLASIB11Ik+Zr0KmfSkez+F+g/Rgc209cBq7GiK/P4Gp 3rTnbw1Qu6eMfYmf9JAcV5mX9S6ESZ2Ju5yzTMG7vFpO00xRNzWtARDDP8wFjnFSXC2/ stFlMuRpGRhTZ6i6O+tn108JHM1T1qc9jKaMI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.85.12 with SMTP id m12mr1046132ibl.60.1313656945302; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.79.145 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:42:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:42:24 +0800 Message-ID: From: liu dapeng To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 18 Aug 2011 08:41:32 -0000 1. YES 2. YES BTW, I assume this solution would be more suitable only for S2a interface if considering using it in 3GPP? Regards, Dapeng Liu 2011/8/11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com : > > > At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload > Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > > Abstract > > This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option > for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access > gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. > Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility > anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on > the selected IP flows. > > Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to > IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. > > The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that > this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the > minutes: > " > 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. > " > > As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG > ML before making a decision. > > Questions: > > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of > interest to the WG? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as > the starting point in specifying the solution? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. > > -Chairs > > The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 > proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available > at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > -- ------ Best Regards, Dapeng Liu From denghui02@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 07:50:46 2011 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 6BEC321F8B98 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:50:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.526 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.526 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.072, 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 rwa6DNcYejNi for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:50:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06BD321F8B92 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so1705488wyg.31 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:51:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=5HuCWyj7SnYrOtgmBdqRYny0ku4o5JH5o7y/72hA214=; b=BLJmkX1l9mwGN9P/EWJf0rehn+5M1uiL89fkjKlVFm+w/3DCvOAI5qpyX+MEYjHGY+ hGS189b0+bnhdaqGRNHSFg6js78JmZ1CHM1GU8k173c7MmhaqiPnrvv5Uyoivk8V3dWO zdItt/4AvUKXJv2dzQFY1vbLC4M2eBBybzBS4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.19.75 with SMTP id m53mr864796wem.73.1313679096148; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.39.193 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:51:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 22:51:35 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e64c3dbedff56e04aac8bfd2 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 14:50:46 -0000 --0016e64c3dbedff56e04aac8bfd2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Yes Yes -Hui 2011/8/11 > > The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > Was discussed > at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting. > > Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated: > " > 5 have read the draft > 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it > 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT > " > > This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So > please respond to the following questions: > > Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI > option as described in I-D: > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D > draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting > point for working on this feature in the WG? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > > Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML. > > -Chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > --0016e64c3dbedff56e04aac8bfd2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes=A0=A0Yes
=A0
-Hui

2011/8/11 <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com>

The proposal: "Access N= etwork Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6"
<draft-gundavel= li-netext-access-network-option-01.txt> Was discussed
at the IETF81 Netext WG meeting.

Rough consensus from polling the WG= members in the room indicated:
"
5 have read the draft
4 thi= nk it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it
2 think it is no cle= ar reason to carry more than ATT
"

This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decis= ion. So
please respond to the following questions:

Q1: Do you agr= ee with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI
option as =A0descri= bed in I-D:
draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt?

Yes =A0[ ]
= No =A0 [ ]

Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D
draft-gundavell= i-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting
point for working = on this feature in the WG?

Yes =A0[ ]
No =A0 [ ]


Please respond by August 18th to th= e above questions on the ML.

-Chairs


____________________= ___________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

--0016e64c3dbedff56e04aac8bfd2-- From denghui02@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 07:55:29 2011 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 C731E21F8B27 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:55:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.529 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, 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 LPihTC1KjYl3 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:55:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93A3B21F8B59 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:55:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so1709419wyg.31 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:56:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=iJL8RqHbX+pULSHef3MUqSlN0wHzygpQ3WJ1vhyUyG4=; b=vkl3HpN3+plvXzAYv1H5RMeFwNEWlJJbYqSdy3lb0Nkq45tz6Rnmey7sU6gmGHr0AT 4j+n0xlbqz6QeGEg1iiP1ZtVp9FGKsDmkZd5R7hVYTB4GU8KozJc92LswrXDkglU/Nz7 1UD9RxHq1tYP83WE0PAaEJkOTNTcZ+bMmypic= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.49.148 with SMTP id x20mr661078web.73.1313679380858; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.39.193 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:56:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 22:56:20 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: liu dapeng Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f7d49ad8462e04aac8d0cd Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt selective IPv4 offloading feature as specified in I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option 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, 18 Aug 2011 14:55:29 -0000 --001485f7d49ad8462e04aac8d0cd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Yes Yes -Hui 2011/8/18 liu dapeng > 1. YES > 2. YES > > BTW, I assume this solution would be more suitable only for S2a > interface if considering using it in 3GPP? > > Regards, > Dapeng Liu > 2011/8/11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com : > > > > > > At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed the proposal: "IP Traffic Offload > > Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > > > > > Abstract > > > > This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option > > for carrying IP Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access > > gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. > > Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility > > anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on > > the selected IP flows. > > > > Please note that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to > > IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality. > > > > The general consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that > > this is a relevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the > > minutes: > > " > > 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. > > " > > > > As per process, the same question is now being asked on the Netext WG > > ML before making a decision. > > > > Questions: > > > > 1. Is the solution to offloading specific IPv4 flows from a MAG of > > interest to the WG? > > > > Yes [ ] > > No [ ] > > > > 2. Should we adopt as WG I-D: > > draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as > > the starting point in specifying the solution? > > > > Yes [ ] > > No [ ] > > > > Please respond to the above questions by August 18, 2011 on the ML. > > > > -Chairs > > > > The slides presented at the meeting are available in the IETF81 > > proceedings. Minutes have been posted to the ML and are also available > > at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > netext mailing list > > netext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > > > > -- > > ------ > Best Regards, > Dapeng Liu > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > --001485f7d49ad8462e04aac8d0cd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes=A0=A0Yes
=A0
-Hui

2011/8/18 liu dapeng <maxpassion@gmail.com>
1. YES
2. YES

BTW, I a= ssume this solution would be more suitable only for S2a
interface if con= sidering using it in 3GPP?

Regards,
Dapeng Liu
2011/8/11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com>:
>
>
> At IETF81, the Netext WG discussed t= he proposal: "IP Traffic Offload
> Selector Option for Proxy Mob= ile IPv6"
> <draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.t= xt>
>
> Abstract
>
> =A0 =A0This specification defines a m= echanism and a related mobility option
> =A0 =A0for carrying IP Offlo= ad traffic selectors between a mobile access
> =A0 =A0gateway and a l= ocal mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain.
> =A0 =A0Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mob= ility
> =A0 =A0anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload tra= ffic rule on
> =A0 =A0the selected IP flows.
>
> Please n= ote that the offloading of traffic from the MAG is limited to
> IPv4 flow only using NAT44 functionality.
>
> The general = consensus of the room at the IETF81 WG meeting was that
> this is a r= elevant problem and should be solved by the WG. As per the
> minutes:=
> "
> 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we= should not.
> "
>
> As per process, the same questi= on is now being asked on the Netext WG
> ML before making a decision.=
>
> Questions:
>
> 1. Is the solution to offloading sp= ecific IPv4 flows from a MAG of
> interest to the WG?
>
>= Yes =A0 [ ]
> No =A0 =A0[ ]
>
> 2. Should we adopt as WG= I-D:
> draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt which will serve as=
> the starting point in specifying the solution?
>
> Yes= =A0[ ]
> No =A0 [ ]
>
> Please respond to the above ques= tions by August 18, 2011 on the ML.
>
> -Chairs
>
> The slides presented at the meeting ar= e available in the IETF81
> proceedings. Minutes have been posted to = the ML and are also available
> at: http://www.ietf.org/proc= eedings/81/minutes/netext.txt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>= ; netext mailing list
> netext@iet= f.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>


--

------
Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu
_______________________________________________
netext= mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= = https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

--001485f7d49ad8462e04aac8d0cd-- From denghui02@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 07:58:10 2011 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 E8CDA21F8B7C for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:58:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, 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 s-pErdCQhlAR for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9CE21F8B74 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyg8 with SMTP id 8so1711653wyg.31 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:59:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=43j+fa+HUKr/Js/yXcaGCYyOUayqV8zazmk0kKeVgds=; b=G//rEvg6uLDUxeaLLyPrUMuorP3d0N88oMmBq8D9AmqdVUfbsQyMqxm1HhcM9Ta2TC RlVp8oYu2C1VgpKXCYvmkwGmO+1sNpYY93OtuvWGjVq8IZk9xh/nqLGi9us9HXT5aeEd wUf2d+j6T7gPCPNVonLP5QD9rsi8aeyEopEKQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.19.75 with SMTP id m53mr872296wem.73.1313679543550; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.39.193 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:59:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 22:59:03 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: liu dapeng Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e64c3dbe8ac36804aac8da61 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 14:58:11 -0000 --0016e64c3dbe8ac36804aac8da61 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Yes Yes -Hui 2011/8/18 liu dapeng > 1. YES > 2. YES > > Best Regards, > Dapeng Liu > > 2011/8/11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com : > > > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > > and observed the following: > > > > " > > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > > How many have read it: 7 > > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > > point to work on the problem? > > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > > " > > > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > > > Question to WG: > > > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > > > Yes [ ] > > No [ ] > > > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > > feature? > > > > Yes [ ] > > No [ ] > > > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > > > -Chairs > > > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > netext mailing list > > netext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > > > > -- > > ------ > Best Regards, > Dapeng Liu > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > --0016e64c3dbe8ac36804aac8da61 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes=A0=A0Yes
=A0
-Hui

2011/8/18 liu dapeng <maxpassion@gmail.com>
1. YES
2. YES

Best Reg= ards,
Dapeng Liu

2011/8/11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com>:
>
> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: = "Prefix Delegation for
> Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-= netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>
>
> General consensus at the Netext W= G meeting was that prefix delegation
> is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to=
> adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD featur= e
> and observed the following:
>
> "
> Chairs= : how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
> How many have read it: 7
> How many think that the proposed solu= tion in the draft can be starting
> point to work on the problem?
= > In favor: 7 ; =A0Opposed: 1
> "
>
> We are now = following up with the questions on the ML.
>
> Question to WG:
>
> 1. Should the WG specify prefi= x-delegation support for PMIP6?
>
> Yes =A0 [ ]
> No =A0 = =A0[ ]
>
> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed= in I-D:
> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
>= feature?
>
> Yes =A0 [ ]
> No =A0 =A0[ ]
>
>= Please respond by August 18th on the ML.
>
> -Chairs
> > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >
>
> _______________________________________________
>= ; netext mailing list
> netext@iet= f.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>


--

------
Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu
_______________________________________________
netext= mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= = https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

--0016e64c3dbe8ac36804aac8da61-- From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 08:49:51 2011 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 8F36D21F8BA9 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:49:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.033 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.033 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.138, 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 cNzj4KXwuFrG for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA03F21F8B62 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:49:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DF8940113 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:50:35 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4D34C9.5050507@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:50:33 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110818-0, 18/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 15:49:51 -0000 Hello Raj, Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. [...] > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] No, unless the problem is clearer. I hope this helps. Alex > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > From sgundave@cisco.com Thu Aug 18 09:13:54 2011 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 D720621F8AC3 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:13:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.284 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.284 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] 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 kO+xf35eogjz for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:13:54 -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 343C821F8ABB for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:13:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=2391; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313684088; x=1314893688; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=eBzRraFrqOEkfIdu/gTBddkFJlyp45EQ6X0IAoxLlwk=; b=Bv2+l032RcT7IOWSpMUHt1yifqv89x47SQDB9i2IUyFmqTBdjj45TlO/ QhLzdkQoGFVaybMDueDSvR2HtVzzDh452n1CJZi8ctiGkgNvU5qD+8x1f h5aXqrKpVuyOFdGJjLkRWbsrfsoxYp6maZ+RWV6gFkdKj97n4xjgUZ7pV I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAOo5TU6rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABCqA9sd4FAAQEBAQIBAQEBDwEpATEQDQEIZwYwAQEEARIJEgeHTwSbCQGfDYZIBIcxL4szhRWEYYcf X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,246,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="14380936" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2011 16:14:48 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7IGEfBE013604; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:14:48 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); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:14:44 -0700 Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:14:43 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:14:41 -0700 From: Sri Gundavelli To: Alexandru Petrescu , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: Acxdwe8x6ThHFsxh8UOICnDQo9uONA== In-Reply-To: <4E4D34C9.5050507@gmail.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2011 16:14:44.0086 (UTC) FILETIME=[F108D160:01CC5DC1] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 16:13:54 -0000 Alex: If I may comment. > Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes > Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition is CMIP enabled. So, the draft is supporting #1. Sri On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" wrote: > Hello Raj, >=20 > Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =E9crit : >>=20 >> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for >> Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>=20 >> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation >> is a required feature for PMIP6. >=20 > Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of > supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >=20 > Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign > MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >=20 > This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >=20 > [...] >> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>=20 >> Question to WG: >>=20 >> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>=20 >> Yes [ ] >> No [ ] >=20 > Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >=20 >> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >> feature? >>=20 >> Yes [ ] >> No [ ] >=20 > No, unless the problem is clearer. >=20 > I hope this helps. >=20 > Alex >=20 >>=20 >> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>=20 >> -Chairs >>=20 >> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From sgundave@cisco.com Thu Aug 18 09:55:23 2011 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 8C0AD21F8B17 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:55:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.254 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.254 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] 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 dlMI5Ruqb+Op for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:55:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B70B821F874E for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:55:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=3900; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313686577; x=1314896177; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=s1v8D35xIM0p0fZ3YE3uTaO3t3683uamFlC7TTAMn3U=; b=al5kbatAojy1x5n52tki9xuUIMU4CYg88rhTaElMbkIvHjllD+LQCMPG prT3SmgnZNPuTUfzH9PoRbrvXpO2QoIbaHzEPcW0SH25/nl0Yprb1OTW/ VrxtK9PuAhPMOdp5oyEosr3Sou0hkWQGwEL7PaZj7M9xfYgI/qFzPBIiC g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EANhCTU6rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABCp3tsd4FAAQEBAQIBAQEBDwEpATEQDQEIGE8GMAEBBAESCRIHh08EmksBnxWGSASHMS+LM4UVhGGHHw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,246,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="14387709" Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2011 16:56:16 +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 p7IGuGmu023827; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:56:16 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); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:56:16 -0700 Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:56:15 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:56:11 -0700 From: Sri Gundavelli To: Alexandru Petrescu , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: Acxdwe8x6ThHFsxh8UOICnDQo9uONAABcwq1 In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2011 16:56:16.0530 (UTC) FILETIME=[BEA59720:01CC5DC7] Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 16:55:23 -0000 > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition = is > CMIP enabled. To ensure the terminology is right: Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the network elements behind the mobile node Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on the MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host behind the mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an address, it wont receive RA's with these PIO's. HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. If DHCP PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, those are simple IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to those prefixes, in the for= m of this draft, we can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided and thos= e prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective. MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have implied, as mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. But, probably NEMO i= s a generic term. Any case, the distinction is understood, with or without CMIP ... Sri On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" wrote: > Alex: >=20 > If I may comment. >=20 >=20 >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of > supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >=20 > #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >=20 >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign > MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >=20 > Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) >=20 > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition = is > CMIP enabled. >=20 >=20 > So, the draft is supporting #1. >=20 >=20 > Sri >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" > wrote: >=20 >> Hello Raj, >>=20 >> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =E9crit : >>>=20 >>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for >>> Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>=20 >>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation >>> is a required feature for PMIP6. >>=20 >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of >> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>=20 >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign >> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>=20 >> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>=20 >> [...] >>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>=20 >>> Question to WG: >>>=20 >>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>=20 >>> Yes [ ] >>> No [ ] >>=20 >> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>=20 >>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>> feature? >>>=20 >>> Yes [ ] >>> No [ ] >>=20 >> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>=20 >> I hope this helps. >>=20 >> Alex >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>=20 >>> -Chairs >>>=20 >>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: >>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From jong-hyouk.lee@inria.fr Thu Aug 18 13:59:41 2011 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 E3D8F21F8B7C for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:59:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.716, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 L3UvefdAmiub for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F02921F86EA for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:59:39 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,247,1312149600"; d="scan'208";a="116242623" Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com ([209.85.212.44]) by mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 18 Aug 2011 23:00:33 +0200 Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so2311254vws.31 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.24.9 with SMTP id q9mr42372vdf.54.1313701232118; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:00:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.185.73 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:00:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jong-Hyouk Lee Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:00:12 +0200 Message-ID: To: Sri Gundavelli , zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307c9d90480c7f04aacde75f Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 20:59:42 -0000 --20cf307c9d90480c7f04aacde75f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Sri. Thanks for sharing your opinions. I would like to also hear a reply from Joy. Joy, could you clearly state your views on the question from Alex? Cheers. On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Sri Gundavelli wrote: > > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definit= ion > is > > CMIP enabled. > > To ensure the terminology is right: > > Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the network > elements behind the mobile node > > Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on the > MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host behind th= e > mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an address, it wont receiv= e > RA's with these PIO's. > > HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. If DH= CP > PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, those are simpl= e > IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to those prefixes, in the > form > of this draft, we can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided and > those > prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective. > > MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have implied, as > mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. But, probably NEMO > is > a generic term. Any case, the distinction is understood, with or without > CMIP ... > > Sri > > > > > > > > On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" wrote: > > > Alex: > > > > If I may comment. > > > > > >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal = of > > supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? > > > > #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes > > > >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assi= gn > > MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. > > > > Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) > > > > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definit= ion > is > > CMIP enabled. > > > > > > So, the draft is supporting #1. > > > > > > Sri > > > > > > > > > > On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" > > wrote: > > > >> Hello Raj, > >> > >> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =C3=A9crit : > >>> > >>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > >>> Proxy Mobile IPv6" > >>> > >>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > >>> is a required feature for PMIP6. > >> > >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal = of > >> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? > >> > >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assi= gn > >> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. > >> > >> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. > >> > >> [...] > >>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > >>> > >>> Question to WG: > >>> > >>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > >>> > >>> Yes [ ] > >>> No [ ] > >> > >> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. > >> > >>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > >>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > >>> feature? > >>> > >>> Yes [ ] > >>> No [ ] > >> > >> No, unless the problem is clearer. > >> > >> I hope this helps. > >> > >> Alex > >> > >>> > >>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > >>> > >>> -Chairs > >>> > >>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: > >>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> netext mailing list > >>> netext@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> netext mailing list > >> netext@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > > > _______________________________________________ > > netext mailing list > > netext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > --=20 IMARA Team, INRIA, France. Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ --20cf307c9d90480c7f04aacde75f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Sri.

Thanks for sharing your opinions. I would like to also hear= a reply from Joy. Joy, could you clearly state your views on the question = from Alex?

Cheers.

On Thu, Aug 18,= 2011 at 6:56 PM, Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> wrote:
> #2 Assigning MNP to = NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition is
> CMIP enabled.

To ensure the terminology is right:

Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the network
elements behind the mobile node

Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on the MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host behind the<= br> mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an address, it wont receive<= br> RA's with these PIO's.

HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. If DHCP=
PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, those are simple<= br> IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to those prefixes, in the for= m
of this draft, we can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided and = those
prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective.

MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have implied, as mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. But, probably NEMO i= s
a generic term. Any case, the distinction is understood, with or without CMIP ...

Sri







On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" <sgundave@cisco.com> wrote:

> Alex:
>
> If I may comment.
>
>
>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the g= oal of
> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP?
>
> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes
>
>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to = assign
> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? =C2=A0The two goals are distinctive IMHO.=
>
> Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) >
> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per defini= tion is
> CMIP enabled.
>
>
> So, the draft is supporting #1.
>
>
> Sri
>
>
>
>
> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Raj,
>>
>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, = Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =C3=A9crit :
>>>
>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Deleg= ation for
>>> Proxy Mobile IPv6"<draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>= ;
>>>
>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix del= egation
>>> is a required feature for PMIP6.
>>
>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the g= oal of
>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP?
>>
>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to = assign
>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? =C2=A0The two goals are distinctive I= MHO.
>>
>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>
>> [...]
>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML.
>>>
>>> Question to WG:
>>>
>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?<= br> >>>
>>> Yes =C2=A0 [ ]
>>> No =C2=A0 =C2=A0[ ]
>>
>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router.
>>
>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this=
>>> feature?
>>>
>>> Yes =C2=A0 [ ]
>>> No =C2=A0 =C2=A0[ ]
>>
>> No, unless the problem is clearer.
>>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>>
>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML.
>>>
>>> -Chairs
>>>
>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this top= ic at:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt=
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netext mailing list
>>> netext@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netext mailing list
>> netext@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext



--
IMARA Team,= INRIA, France.
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and = /dev/random.

#email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee = (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/
--20cf307c9d90480c7f04aacde75f-- From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Thu Aug 18 14:02:26 2011 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 F118911E809F for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:02:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.626 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.027, 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 Tol5V8wtzAb7 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F1D21F8B88 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh102.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.23]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7IL2h6v003043; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:03:16 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:03:05 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.61) by NOK-am1MHUB-02.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:03:04 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-024.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.4.132]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:03:04 +0200 From: To: , , Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? Thread-Index: AQHMV6VIS+vHAvnEiUyuG4wvA5tZB5UirE6AgAAGvoD///y/AA== Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 21:03:03 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.28] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <1DD323938F60A34B8F02A898700B0D2D@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2011 21:03:05.0071 (UTC) FILETIME=[39399FF0:01CC5DEA] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 21:02:26 -0000 Alex, Does Sri's comment address your question? -Raj On 8/18/11 11:14 AM, "ext Sri Gundavelli" wrote: >Alex: > >If I may comment. > > >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of >supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? > >#1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes > >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign >MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. > >Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) > >#2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition >is >CMIP enabled. > > >So, the draft is supporting #1. > > >Sri > > > > >On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" >wrote: > >> Hello Raj, >>=20 >> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =E9crit : >>>=20 >>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for >>> Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>=20 >>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation >>> is a required feature for PMIP6. >>=20 >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of >> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>=20 >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign >> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>=20 >> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>=20 >> [...] >>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>=20 >>> Question to WG: >>>=20 >>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>=20 >>> Yes [ ] >>> No [ ] >>=20 >> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>=20 >>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>> feature? >>>=20 >>> Yes [ ] >>> No [ ] >>=20 >> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>=20 >> I hope this helps. >>=20 >> Alex >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>=20 >>> -Chairs >>>=20 >>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: >>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > >_______________________________________________ >netext mailing list >netext@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Thu Aug 18 14:51:48 2011 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 D0B3411E80BC for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:51:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.572 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, 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 SlAQ6MY9V9dr for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B97611E80A9 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bkar4 with SMTP id r4so2126331bka.31 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:52:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=0xV+/vrq6kYbgGHeCuInzHpatrusA2qTf8X0Jb9Vh3Q=; b=LXagNM50Mbdd0NBhjAJTxQOb9NGcWiHizLaMwwi8NzOC/KlIkjaks+u1+XOtdVLlQ2 YQ+N+mnYtRWsQiO5w2tjWQjjUb1Xq8Zh6a9nNxOYfB4LjWaT2GbX2RzuT15JYsR8yjgk DiMt+75ZvXgflp+TqYUDXGclzD2INhvAmb2Ms= Received: by 10.204.170.193 with SMTP id e1mr578546bkz.315.1313704360588; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:52:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a88-114-172-24.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-172-24.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.172.24]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f9sm849357bkt.3.2011.08.18.14.52.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:52:39 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Jouni In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:52:36 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4E0D0C6B-1A81-4330-A9ED-873A2E8F4088@gmail.com> References: To: Jong-Hyouk Lee X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 18 Aug 2011 21:51:48 -0000 It is about providing mobility for delegated prefixes. - Jouni (as a co-author) On Aug 19, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Jong-Hyouk Lee wrote: > Hi, Sri. >=20 > Thanks for sharing your opinions. I would like to also hear a reply = from Joy. Joy, could you clearly state your views on the question from = Alex? >=20 > Cheers. >=20 > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Sri Gundavelli = wrote: > > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per = definition is > > CMIP enabled. >=20 > To ensure the terminology is right: >=20 > Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the network > elements behind the mobile node >=20 > Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on = the > MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host behind = the > mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an address, it wont = receive > RA's with these PIO's. >=20 > HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. If = DHCP > PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, those are = simple > IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to those prefixes, in = the form > of this draft, we can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided and = those > prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective. >=20 > MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have implied, = as > mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. But, probably = NEMO is > a generic term. Any case, the distinction is understood, with or = without > CMIP ... >=20 > Sri >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" wrote: >=20 > > Alex: > > > > If I may comment. > > > > > >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the = goal of > > supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? > > > > #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes > > > >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to = assign > > MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. > > > > Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) > > > > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per = definition is > > CMIP enabled. > > > > > > So, the draft is supporting #1. > > > > > > Sri > > > > > > > > > > On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" = > > wrote: > > > >> Hello Raj, > >> > >> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =E9crit : > >>> > >>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > >>> Proxy Mobile IPv6" > >>> > >>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix = delegation > >>> is a required feature for PMIP6. > >> > >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the = goal of > >> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? > >> > >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to = assign > >> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. > >> > >> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. > >> > >> [...] > >>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > >>> > >>> Question to WG: > >>> > >>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > >>> > >>> Yes [ ] > >>> No [ ] > >> > >> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. > >> > >>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > >>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > >>> feature? > >>> > >>> Yes [ ] > >>> No [ ] > >> > >> No, unless the problem is clearer. > >> > >> I hope this helps. > >> > >> Alex > >> > >>> > >>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > >>> > >>> -Chairs > >>> > >>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic = at: > >>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> netext mailing list > >>> netext@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> netext mailing list > >> netext@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > > > _______________________________________________ > > netext mailing list > > netext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > IMARA Team, INRIA, France.=20 > Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. >=20 > #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria = (dot) fr > #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 06:35:02 2011 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 410C821F8B10 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:35:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.061 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.061 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.110, 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 V2KURs1ZeIbz for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AAE921F8B04 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D229400C2; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:35:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4E66B5.9090206@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:35:49 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 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 110819-0, 19/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 19 Aug 2011 13:35:02 -0000 Le 18/08/2011 18:14, Sri Gundavelli a écrit : > Alex: > > If I may comment. > > >> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >> goal of > supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? > > #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes Hm. I thought it was only for initial assignment of prefixes (DHCP), not for mobility (PBU). I.e. assign prefix(es) upon initial attachment, with DHCP, and then do PBU to support mobility. >> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to >> assign > MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. > > Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) I am not sure. Initial assignment is different than PBU upon each movement. And the PMIP spec has a need (IIRC) to assign that HNP somehow. > #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per > definition is CMIP enabled. Yes, NEMO MR by definition is CMIP enabled (and CMIP/NEMO does not assign MNP to MR). I meant to say that PMIP may need, in some cases only, to assign an HNP for MR (HoA) _and_ an MNP for the LFNs behind MR. In some cases these two prefixes are different. > So, the draft is supporting #1. Does the draft imply that the same delegated prefix is used to form addresses for LFNs _and_ to form the HoA of MR? Alex From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 06:43:02 2011 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 0B52221F8B31 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:43:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.079 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, 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 hiH2cwksnBZ8 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0128421F86E0 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0144E94009B; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:43:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4E6895.6000907@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:43:49 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 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 110819-0, 19/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 19 Aug 2011 13:43:02 -0000 Le 18/08/2011 18:56, Sri Gundavelli a écrit : >> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per >> definition is CMIP enabled. > > To ensure the terminology is right: > > Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the network > elements behind the mobile node. Ok. Sounds as the MNP to me ("Mobile Network Prefix"), sent by MR in RA on its ingress interface, and used by LFN to form address. Or maybe stored by MR in its dhcpd.conf, runs as DHCP Server, and LFN as Client. > Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on > the MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host > behind the mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an > address, it wont receive RA's with these PIO's. Hosted Prefix sounds as the HNP to me ("Home Network Prefix", or so, typical of PMIP). > HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. Yes, except that PMIP does not specify how that HNP is assigned, and it could be done with DHCP. For example, LMA could do DHCP-PD to obtain that HNP, and put that HNP in the PBU/PBA; but still use that DHCP-PD to obtain the prefix. I believe currently the PMIP may need something like this. > If DHCP PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, > those are simple IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to > those prefixes, in the form of this draft, we can group them as > HNP's, as mobility is provided and those prefixes are anchored on > the LMA, from routing perspective. YEs, it could be so. But I am not sure the best way is to anchor all prefixes at LMA. We could give freedom to have some prefixes "anchored" at another entity than the LMA, maybe the DHCP Server, or maybe not even the DHCP Server but some Gateway. > MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have > implied, as mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. > But, probably NEMO is a generic term. Any case, the distinction is > understood, with or without CMIP ... Yes, NEMO is a too generic term, I confuse it some times too. But sure CMIP/NEMO does not assign prefixes. (there is recently a different RFC doing DHCP-PD for NEMO, but this PD is not in the base spec NEMO RFC). Alex > > Sri > > > > > > > > On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" wrote: > >> Alex: >> >> If I may comment. >> >> >>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >>> goal of >> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >> >> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >> >>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily >>> to assign >> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >> >> Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) >> >> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per >> definition is CMIP enabled. >> >> >> So, the draft is supporting #1. >> >> >> Sri >> >> >> >> >> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru >> Petrescu" wrote: >> >>> Hello Raj, >>> >>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : >>>> >>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation >>>> for Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>> >>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix >>>> delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. >>> >>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >>> goal of supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>> >>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily >>> to assign MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are >>> distinctive IMHO. >>> >>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>> >>> [...] >>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>> >>>> Question to WG: >>>> >>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>> >>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>> >>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>> >>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>>> feature? >>>> >>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>> >>> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>> >>> I hope this helps. >>> >>> Alex >>> >>>> >>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>> >>>> -Chairs >>>> >>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this >>>> topic at: >>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>>> list netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>> list netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> >> _______________________________________________ netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > From mglt.ietf@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 06:46:30 2011 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 D4D3821F8B34 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:46:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.697 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345] 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 dkF++7P8Qbbs for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EB221F86E0 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gyf3 with SMTP id 3so2537489gyf.31 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:47:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4bdvU7etHltW47JFXKlodwb0JYDv4mY5xZpJnNjbsj8=; b=Yi+Wd+DiAA0+ThQHg4oT7fZevEGxcpCSEISETSC48+yBAu3YkzCizca+uLYHZJ3pGA MchkwArwR3WNlw4oHybyHU5dxESlKi050dvY9lCXcvxJNYeLJWryGIKXEbOq+f/YGvbR 8ZRmnlTRPGQwJiip+ahnfKNq02VHGHTuo1vUM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.91.26.35 with SMTP id d35mr2426980agj.20.1313761644506; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.206.206 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:47:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:47:24 +0200 Message-ID: From: Daniel Migault To: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f86f3a23ef1b04aadbf8ea Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogUmU6IENvbnNlbnN1cyBjYWxsOiBXb3JrIG9u?= =?gb2312?b?IHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgcHJlZml4IGRlbGVnYXRpb24gZm9yIFByb3h5?= =?gb2312?b?IE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2Pw==?= 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, 19 Aug 2011 13:46:30 -0000 --001485f86f3a23ef1b04aadbf8ea Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Q1:YES Q2:YES I agree the use case should be more detailed. Regards, Daniel 2011/8/16 > > Hello Lee, > Many thanks for your support. I will read the reference materials you > provide. Regarding the comment, I will details the use case in the future > version. > > Best Regards, > Joy > > > *Jong-Hyouk Lee * > > 2011-08-11 =CF=C2=CE=E7 09:50 > =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB > zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn > =B3=AD=CB=CD > Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org > =D6=F7=CC=E2 > Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Pro= xy > Mobile IPv6? > > > > > Q1: Yes. > Q2: Yes. > > Comments: As pointed, the use cases should be provided and personally I > would like to introduce the following articles recently published: > > 1. Lightweight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems"= , > IEEE Systems Journal: *http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681* > 2. Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork MObility for Intelligent > Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology: * > http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949* > > Cheers. > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM, <*Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de*> > wrote: > Q1: Yes > Q2: Yes > Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the > phrase > 'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router witho= ut > extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ... > > Thanks! > > Regards > Dirk > > > [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy > Mobile IPv6? > > > At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for > Proxy Mobile IPv6" > > General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation > is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to > adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature > and observed the following: > > " > Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19 > How many have read it: 7 > How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting > point to work on the problem? > In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 > " > > We are now following up with the questions on the ML. > > Question to WG: > > 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: > draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this > feature? > > Yes [ ] > No [ ] > > Please respond by August 18th on the ML. > > -Chairs > > Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:* > **http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt* > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list* > **netext@ietf.org* * > **https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext* > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list* > **netext@ietf.org* * > **https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext* > > > > -- > IMARA Team, INRIA, France. > Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. > > #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) f= r > #webpage: *https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/* > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > --=20 Daniel Migault Orange Labs -- Security +33 6 70 72 69 58 --001485f86f3a23ef1b04aadbf8ea Content-Type: text/html; charset=GB2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Q1:YES
Q2:YES
I agree the use case should be more detailed.
Regards, 
Daniel

= 2011/8/16 <zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn>

Hello Lee,
Many thanks for your support. I wi= ll read the reference materials you provide. Regarding the comment, I will details the use case in the future version.

Best Regards,
Joy


Jong-Hyouk Lee &l= t;jong-hyouk.l= ee@inria.fr>

2011-08-11 =CF=C2=CE=E7 09:50

=CA=D5=BC=FE=C8= =CB
zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn
=B3=AD=CB=CD
Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.co= m, netext@ietf.org
=D6=F7=CC=E2
Re: [netext] Consensus call: = Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?





Q1: Yes.
Q2: Yes.

Comments: As pointed, the use cases should be provided and personally I would like to introduce the following articles recently published:

1. Lightweight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems", IEEE Systems Journal: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681
2. Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork M= Obility for Intelligent Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicula= r Technology: http://dx.doi.org/= 10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949

Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM, <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> wrote:
Q1: Yes
Q2: Yes
Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the phrase
'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router wit= hout extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me ...

Thanks!

Regards
Dirk


[netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Pref= ix Delegation for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ;  Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:=
http://www.ietf.org/= proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt


_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman= /listinfo/netext
_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman= /listinfo/netext



--
IMARA Team, INRIA, France.
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random.

#email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/sit= e/hurryon/

_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext




--
Daniel M= igault
Orange Labs -- Security
+33 6 70 72 69 58
--001485f86f3a23ef1b04aadbf8ea-- From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 06:48:05 2011 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 5D98821F888A for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:48:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, 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 m6PdIzd5gUha for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F3BF21F884C for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:48:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C434940138; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:48:53 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4E69C4.3000106@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:48:52 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110819-0, 19/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 19 Aug 2011 13:48:05 -0000 Le 18/08/2011 23:03, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : > > Alex, > > Does Sri's comment address your question? It discusses about what the problem is. Towards that end I thank him. But it is still not clear to me the goal of this draft. What problem does it address? - is it to support Mobile Routers (LFNs behind MR) in a PMIP domain? - is it to assign the typical HNP to a PMIP Mobile Host? (PMIP spec does not tell how LMA obtains these prefixes, and DHCP-PD is a good tool). - is it to do both above? Depending on these two goals there are various mechanisms which can be useful, not only DHCP-PD. For example, there was a bitwise split solution presented by Suresh at a plenary some IETFs ago. Alex > > -Raj > > On 8/18/11 11:14 AM, "ext Sri Gundavelli" wrote: > >> Alex: >> >> If I may comment. >> >> >>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >>> goal of >> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >> >> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >> >>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily >>> to assign >> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >> >> Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) >> >> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per >> definition is CMIP enabled. >> >> >> So, the draft is supporting #1. >> >> >> Sri >> >> >> >> >> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru >> Petrescu" wrote: >> >>> Hello Raj, >>> >>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : >>>> >>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation >>>> for Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>> >>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix >>>> delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. >>> >>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >>> goal of supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>> >>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily >>> to assign MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are >>> distinctive IMHO. >>> >>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>> >>> [...] >>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>> >>>> Question to WG: >>>> >>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>> >>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>> >>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>> >>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>>> feature? >>>> >>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>> >>> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>> >>> I hope this helps. >>> >>> Alex >>> >>>> >>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>> >>>> -Chairs >>>> >>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this >>>> topic at: >>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>>> list netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>> list netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> >> _______________________________________________ netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 06:49:33 2011 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 CB7B721F8AEA for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:49:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, 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 p-yYCy5OrbNv for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:49:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E421721F8A30 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:49:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D56940155 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:50:23 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4E6A1D.70302@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:50:21 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: <4E0D0C6B-1A81-4330-A9ED-873A2E8F4088@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E0D0C6B-1A81-4330-A9ED-873A2E8F4088@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110819-0, 19/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 19 Aug 2011 13:49:33 -0000 Le 18/08/2011 23:52, Jouni a écrit : > > It is about providing mobility for delegated prefixes. Thanks Jouni. Is it for an MR? If yes, then there may exist other solutions possible as well. Have you considered them? Alex > > - Jouni (as a co-author) > > > On Aug 19, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Jong-Hyouk Lee wrote: > >> Hi, Sri. >> >> Thanks for sharing your opinions. I would like to also hear a reply from Joy. Joy, could you clearly state your views on the question from Alex? >> >> Cheers. >> >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Sri Gundavelli wrote: >>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition is >>> CMIP enabled. >> >> To ensure the terminology is right: >> >> Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the network >> elements behind the mobile node >> >> Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on the >> MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host behind the >> mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an address, it wont receive >> RA's with these PIO's. >> >> HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. If DHCP >> PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, those are simple >> IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to those prefixes, in the form >> of this draft, we can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided and those >> prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective. >> >> MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have implied, as >> mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. But, probably NEMO is >> a generic term. Any case, the distinction is understood, with or without >> CMIP ... >> >> Sri >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" wrote: >> >>> Alex: >>> >>> If I may comment. >>> >>> >>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of >>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>> >>> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >>> >>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign >>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>> >>> Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) >>> >>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition is >>> CMIP enabled. >>> >>> >>> So, the draft is supporting #1. >>> >>> >>> Sri >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Raj, >>>> >>>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for >>>>> Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>>> >>>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation >>>>> is a required feature for PMIP6. >>>> >>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of >>>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>>> >>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign >>>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>>> >>>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>>> >>>> [...] >>>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> Question to WG: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>>> >>>>> Yes [ ] >>>>> No [ ] >>>> >>>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>>> >>>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>>>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>>>> feature? >>>>> >>>>> Yes [ ] >>>>> No [ ] >>>> >>>> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>>> >>>> I hope this helps. >>>> >>>> Alex >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> -Chairs >>>>> >>>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at: >>>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> netext mailing list >>>>> netext@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> netext mailing list >>>> netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> >> >> >> -- >> IMARA Team, INRIA, France. >> Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. >> >> #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr >> #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 06:50:47 2011 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 A43E321F8AEA for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:50:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.061, 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 cQJ3ibjcxzIc for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:50:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1EF621F8AF8 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 06:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BE4C94010D for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:51:36 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4E6A66.2030307@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:51:34 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: netext@ietf.org References: <4E4E69C4.3000106@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E4E69C4.3000106@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110819-0, 19/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 19 Aug 2011 13:50:47 -0000 Le 19/08/2011 15:48, Alexandru Petrescu a écrit : > Le 18/08/2011 23:03, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : >> >> Alex, >> >> Does Sri's comment address your question? > > It discusses about what the problem is. Towards that end I thank him. > > But it is still not clear to me the goal of this draft. What problem > does it address? > > - is it to support Mobile Routers (LFNs behind MR) in a PMIP domain? > - is it to assign the typical HNP to a PMIP Mobile Host? (PMIP spec > does not tell how LMA obtains these prefixes, and DHCP-PD is a good > tool). > - is it to do both above? > > Depending on these two goals there are various mechanisms which can be > useful, not only DHCP-PD. For example, there was a bitwise split > solution presented by Suresh at a plenary some IETFs ago. ^^^^^^^ I meant intarea not plenary. Alex > > Alex > >> >> -Raj >> >> On 8/18/11 11:14 AM, "ext Sri Gundavelli" wrote: >> >>> Alex: >>> >>> If I may comment. >>> >>> >>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >>>> goal of >>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>> >>> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >>> >>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily >>>> to assign >>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>> >>> Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1) >>> >>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per >>> definition is CMIP enabled. >>> >>> >>> So, the draft is supporting #1. >>> >>> >>> Sri >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru >>> Petrescu" wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Raj, >>>> >>>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation >>>>> for Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>>> >>>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix >>>>> delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. >>>> >>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the >>>> goal of supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>>> >>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily >>>> to assign MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are >>>> distinctive IMHO. >>>> >>>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>>> >>>> [...] >>>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> Question to WG: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>>> >>>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>>> >>>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>>> >>>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>>>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>>>> feature? >>>>> >>>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>>> >>>> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>>> >>>> I hope this helps. >>>> >>>> Alex >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> -Chairs >>>>> >>>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this >>>>> topic at: >>>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>>>> list netext@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>>> list netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>> >>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 19 07:39:26 2011 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 2AC7721F8AB8 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:39:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.625 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.625 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.026, 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 e0PITwehZn+a for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96BF921F8880 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7JEeK7P001208 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:40:21 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:40:20 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.58) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:40:19 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-051.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.86]) by 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.58]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:40:19 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 Thread-Index: AQHMXn3qkDS+mGKLekOXSUG2PEKO3g== Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:40:18 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 14:40:20.0049 (UTC) FILETIME=[EB6B1C10:01CC5E7D] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 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, 19 Aug 2011 14:39:26 -0000 Hello, The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Flow Mobility, I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed. Please see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for the details of the consensus call itself. Conclusion is as follows: There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it being posted as the WG doc. Chairs request the editor (Carlos Bernardos) and co-authors to revise the draft accordingly and submit it as the WG document. -Raj From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 19 07:53:17 2011 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 C4FC721F8AF2 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:53:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.624 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.624 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.025, 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 nCI2QliTRA2W for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:53:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-sa01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F221021F8AF0 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:53:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh104.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.30]) by mgw-sa01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7JEsC8Q010228 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:54:12 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:54:12 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.56) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:54:11 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-051.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.86]) by 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.56]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:54:11 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Conclusion of consensus call to adopt draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHMXn/akDjwqr0AJEqKzafY7jclvg== Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:54:11 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 14:54:12.0565 (UTC) FILETIME=[DBA2F850:01CC5E7F] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-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: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:53:17 -0000 The consensus call http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02071.html to adopt "IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6" Has now concluded.=20 Conclusion: The feedback indicates that WG members support the specification of this capability/feature for Proxy Mobile IPv6. Additionally there is rough consensus to adopt I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt as the starting point of the working group document. Chairs request authors to submit an updated version of the I-D as WG document. Please note that the I-D should clearly indicate that this feature is intended to affect only IPv4 flows. -Raj From behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com Fri Aug 19 08:17:00 2011 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 C707A21F8AF7 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:17:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.523 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.524, BAYES_50=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 Q1TP21w5rs5Z for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm23-vm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm23-vm6.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.116]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 43C2A21F8922 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.49] by nm23.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Aug 2011 15:17:54 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.254] by tm2.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Aug 2011 15:17:54 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1046.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Aug 2011 15:17:54 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 775041.15393.bm@omp1046.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 9217 invoked by uid 60001); 19 Aug 2011 15:17:54 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1313767074; bh=yr33CyU+hm/ZwrvGfZvxsZEw35LZ5jaBcgcfllgVUoA=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Y0J8SADqFDMd4WaelFo5dSisYG/FGuVKvtlJVC/hYk4L+oxGM6pI4qCyko37uI1OTOc+jzJXK7PbGUNFTrHFQmvLzafTz2IOe7fjAnfdq4VRgXlRzIcy0OT7hNsS4gIBAUKa8ElhFfqloUhSsP8kZSleSE7vMR/T9YHfIwPKlT4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dEqBfzNcraFRjpMtDrF6JO4Mzri3cCyWpXRjNqs+9lCSnJI3R1JGfkFVtTGYM3ts0V0o9qxShijfm+AtQ0oSrNoTBEhrl1KDqjj2FxXMAYehydOarbCv1zVeLidzzX0NzNlqglpFOKwoXTRMen3+I0RlJBdXJiG7F85jzcRL4e8=; X-YMail-OSG: cMW60HQVM1leO1rO.CLY02vXCvuWKUTzU9YpbWZSNtYzhxM dGvSMB7G.KtRsrorQx7xrbAFO5HDP4M3XrHzNHATWMVzgrtQtpV.E32gWOAG fJDEQymPjApwNeAWMgkCr.t0APTl6oET4lYS1J35swIeqb4ZVkDzBlKXeoC9 JNeo9nzjBV2eK_oNP_D.JLI9PHVyJDUhVJ00N8XSnciiWaYrQco1YdSiADwT pRnxqY3PanBZ4r.A6kS8oNBWqXh5YkOQGk53tbd31gxurn7Unz6r3A2M1gkp BuPL1no7sAHZf1bPfph2w67ESZfwlxaD1g3.l0PGqiBDVoH_djs7BOl8IzEy a7aL3svjyyO8v0xc37KMwHmftsYT5sWSZ8HKzAW7V1.weOXA7ipTt44GPclQ 3MmEKx1.VB8mUymx23gK3Z4bund2m8QAhlnOjjCQDyOaWGfK5JUW8DJ6ZEfH 4hAtowavV0NTlzU4SYNyS9mEWCw70E7icH3tTH1l.ueFcb8YjIaSVNGZ7saw phkHWJ_7l_rahgKNP3MFUJ_uj5r9Z..FLsu7femUPk8GL1Gv.jTSA5FSQB8h K Received: from [50.58.7.243] by web111406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:17:54 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.113.313619 References: Message-ID: <1313767074.5573.YahooMailNeo@web111406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 08:17:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Behcet Sarikaya To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" , "netext@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya 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, 19 Aug 2011 15:17:00 -0000 Hello, > > Hello, > > The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility, > I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed. > Please see > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for > the details of the consensus call itself. > > Conclusion is as follows: > > There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of > the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA > initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it > being posted as the WG doc. Remove LMA initiated flow switching? What are you talking about? It is 95% of the draft. The design team agreed to make it LMA initiated. I could not see the consensus on this technical issue from the mail, how did it come about? Talk to Yokota-san, he is going to tell you why LMA/HA initiated flow switching is feasible and should be done. Regards, Behcet From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Fri Aug 19 09:08:08 2011 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 990E921F8862 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:08:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, 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 o8GhZquGvhwH for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail73.telekom.de (tcmail73.telekom.de [217.243.239.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFA2121F85CE for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he110889.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.92.130]) by tcmail71.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 19 Aug 2011 18:07:27 +0200 Received: from HE111628.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.134.93.20) by HE110889.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.134.92.130) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.83.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 18:07:27 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([169.254.4.49]) by HE111628.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 18:07:27 +0200 From: To: , , Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 18:07:26 +0200 Thread-Topic: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 Thread-Index: Acxegy+N7YRqnGdqTuKvwzsOtCNkqwABY7kQ Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2642AC0AAE@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <1313767074.5573.YahooMailNeo@web111406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1313767074.5573.YahooMailNeo@web111406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 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, 19 Aug 2011 16:08:08 -0000 Hi Behcet, You may have missed the mail exchange between Julien, Stefano and Raj http:= //www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02123.html where upon cha= irs initiated the new proposal as described in http://www.ietf.org/mail-arc= hive/web/netext/current/msg02130.html. Personally I would also have liked to include text in the draft which recom= mends proper measures in case of LMA/HA initiated flow switching on require= d re-assurance between LMA and current MAG that MN ist still able to access= the new MAG instead of removing it completely ... Fact is that a majority voted for adoption of the draft with LMA text befor= e Aug. 12 ... Best regards Dirk -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- Von: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag vo= n Behcet Sarikaya Gesendet: Freitag, 19. August 2011 17:18 An: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com; netext@ietf.org Betreff: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-berna= rdos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 Hello, > > Hello, > > The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility, > I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed. > Please see > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for > the details of the consensus call itself. > > Conclusion is as follows: > > There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of > the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA > initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it > being posted as the WG doc. Remove LMA initiated flow switching? What are you talking about? It is 95% of the draft. The design team agreed to make it LMA initiated. I could not see the consensus on this technical issue from the mail, how di= d it come about? Talk to Yokota-san, he is going to tell you why LMA/HA initiated flow switc= hing is feasible and should be done. Regards, Behcet _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From rkoodli@cisco.com Fri Aug 19 09:30:03 2011 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 A57F621F884C for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:30:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.266 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.667, 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 NLW1p0Ihqyqe for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:30:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D3CE21F8B13 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:30:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rkoodli@cisco.com; l=2738; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313771460; x=1314981060; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=AxiYk5lT/tlquZT5p7YIxZGSvpfE49sfEefnNWeXtP4=; b=eDXrXPyaaS5Y9NuY6Xu0Xuk2bw32kmXX8IgX18jHFt0YYrh5qJ9hR6+C OMj4B8d5ZRNvZlJpxp/debxSJVT73rMF+QcfY7C4JPFBCV4EnWrE8sQJt tURZxNOMtXqZEzxzRFzFfI5lzNT7slcoSYw7FvlHnzlkwuSlUD5LJK6wo g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAFyPTk6tJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABCqA13gUABAQEBAgEBAQEPASkBMRANAQg/Lh8RAQEEARIJGYdPBJopAZ5xhkgEhzEvizOFFYwA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,251,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="14737495" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2011 16:30:57 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com [72.163.63.8]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7JGUv0i012036; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:30:57 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) by xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:30:57 -0500 Received: from 10.21.65.170 ([10.21.65.170]) by XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:30:56 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.24.0.100205 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:41:24 -0700 From: Rajeev Koodli To: , , , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 Thread-Index: Acxegy+N7YRqnGdqTuKvwzsOtCNkqwABY7kQAAGFqNA= In-Reply-To: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2642AC0AAE@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 16:30:57.0265 (UTC) FILETIME=[5F81E610:01CC5E8D] Subject: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 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, 19 Aug 2011 16:30:03 -0000 My understanding is that the topic will be discussed after we have a WG document (which is long overdue). Raj: please clarify otherwise. Thanks. -Rajeev On 8/19/11 9:07 AM, "Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de" wrote: > Hi Behcet, > You may have missed the mail exchange between Julien, Stefano and Raj > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02123.html where u= pon > chairs initiated the new proposal as described in > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02130.html. > Personally I would also have liked to include text in the draft which > recommends proper measures in case of LMA/HA initiated flow switching on > required re-assurance between LMA and current MAG that MN ist still able = to > access the new MAG instead of removing it completely ... >=20 > Fact is that a majority voted for adoption of the draft with LMA text bef= ore > Aug. 12 ... >=20 > Best regards > Dirk > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag = von > Behcet Sarikaya > Gesendet: Freitag, 19. August 2011 17:18 > An: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com; netext@ietf.org > Betreff: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt > I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 >=20 > Hello, >=20 >=20 >>=20 >> Hello, >>=20 >> The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 >> Extensions to Support Flow Mobility, >> I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed. >> Please see >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for >> the details of the consensus call itself. >>=20 >> Conclusion is as follows: >>=20 >> There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of >> the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA >> initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it >> being posted as the WG doc. >=20 >=20 > Remove LMA initiated flow switching? >=20 > What are you talking about? >=20 > It is 95% of the draft. The design team agreed to make it LMA initiated. >=20 >=20 >=20 > I could not see the consensus on this technical issue from the mail, how = did > it come about? >=20 > Talk to Yokota-san, he is going to tell you why LMA/HA initiated flow > switching is feasible and should be done. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Behcet >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 19 10:39:36 2011 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 7BF2621F8B9E for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:39:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.123 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.123 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.476, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 FpqTwS-8ldrZ for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BA2221F8B8C for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7JHeQrH024477; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:40:28 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:40:21 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.58) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 19:40:21 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-051.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.86]) by 008-AM1MMR1-003.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.58]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 19:40:20 +0200 From: To: , , , Thread-Topic: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 Thread-Index: AQHMXo1jirFOmIWdr0ya1dwviL2A8JUj+6yA Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:40:19 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <96BAA84FBEA33041AB5502CAF4D39563@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 17:40:21.0751 (UTC) FILETIME=[11BC0870:01CC5E97] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 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, 19 Aug 2011 17:39:36 -0000 With Chair hat on: Please see:=20 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02130.html The LMA initiated feature will be considered if a reasonable solution is proposed and accepted by the WG at a later date. However it will not be a part of the initial WG document. -Raj On 8/19/11 11:41 AM, "ext Rajeev Koodli" wrote: > > > >My understanding is that the topic will be discussed after we have a WG >document (which is long overdue). > >Raj: please clarify otherwise. > >Thanks. > >-Rajeev > > > >On 8/19/11 9:07 AM, "Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de" >wrote: > >> Hi Behcet, >> You may have missed the mail exchange between Julien, Stefano and Raj >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02123.html where >>upon >> chairs initiated the new proposal as described in >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02130.html. >> Personally I would also have liked to include text in the draft which >> recommends proper measures in case of LMA/HA initiated flow switching on >> required re-assurance between LMA and current MAG that MN ist still >>able to >> access the new MAG instead of removing it completely ... >>=20 >> Fact is that a majority voted for adoption of the draft with LMA text >>before >> Aug. 12 ... >>=20 >> Best regards >> Dirk >> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] Im >>Auftrag von >> Behcet Sarikaya >> Gesendet: Freitag, 19. August 2011 17:18 >> An: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com; netext@ietf.org >> Betreff: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt >> I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 >>=20 >> Hello, >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Hello, >>>=20 >>> The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 >>> Extensions to Support Flow Mobility, >>> I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed. >>> Please see >>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for >>> the details of the consensus call itself. >>>=20 >>> Conclusion is as follows: >>>=20 >>> There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of >>> the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA >>> initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it >>> being posted as the WG doc. >>=20 >>=20 >> Remove LMA initiated flow switching? >>=20 >> What are you talking about? >>=20 >> It is 95% of the draft. The design team agreed to make it LMA initiated. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> I could not see the consensus on this technical issue from the mail, >>how did >> it come about? >>=20 >> Talk to Yokota-san, he is going to tell you why LMA/HA initiated flow >> switching is feasible and should be done. >>=20 >> Regards, >>=20 >> Behcet >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 19 10:44:05 2011 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 D6A7821F8A69 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:44:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.639 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.639 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.040, 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 EsK7MNxwtY60 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EC6421F86B6 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:44:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7JHis0W006416; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:44:59 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.7]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:44:43 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.61) by NOK-AM1MHUB-03.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 19:44:43 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-051.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.86]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 19:44:43 +0200 From: To: , Thread-Topic: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 Thread-Index: AQHMXn3qkDS+mGKLekOXSUG2PEKO3pUkJ9IA///VMwA= Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:44:42 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1313767074.5573.YahooMailNeo@web111406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 17:44:43.0272 (UTC) FILETIME=[AD9CF880:01CC5E97] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 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, 19 Aug 2011 17:44:06 -0000 Behcet, Please read the following email: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02130.html that I posted to the list. There is no good solution to the critical issue that has been raised by Julien et al. If you or anyone has a good solution, please convince the WG. At this time the I-D will be accepted as WG doc without this feature included. Period. -Raj On 8/19/11 10:17 AM, "ext Behcet Sarikaya" wrote: >Hello, > > >>=20 >> Hello, >>=20 >> The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6 >> Extensions to Support Flow Mobility, >> I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed. >> Please see >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for >> the details of the consensus call itself. >>=20 >> Conclusion is as follows: >>=20 >> There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of >> the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA >> initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it >> being posted as the WG doc. > > >Remove LMA initiated flow switching? > >What are you talking about? > >It is 95% of the draft. The design team agreed to make it LMA initiated. > > > >I could not see the consensus on this technical issue from the mail, how >did it come about? > >Talk to Yokota-san, he is going to tell you why LMA/HA initiated flow >switching is feasible and should be done. > >Regards, > >Behcet > From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 19 12:52:11 2011 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 4562111E80A3 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 12:52:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.638 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.638 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.039, 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 Fymr06r06SZA for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 12:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8F3111E8094 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 12:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh102.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.23]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7JJqbje022282 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 22:53:06 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 22:52:36 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.56) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:52:35 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-051.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.86]) by 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.56]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:52:26 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Conclusion of consensus call to adopt draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHMXqmEQU7TaclfD0Sz4jOsAO34PA== Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 19:52:26 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2B4F14BFCFE1E04EA1E443F736C74CE4@nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 19:52:36.0281 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B153A90:01CC5EA9] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt draft-zhou-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: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 19:52:11 -0000 The consensus call to adopt as WG baseline "Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6", I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt has concluded.=20 Consensus call email is at: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02070.html Conclusion drawn from the WG meeting at IETF81 and on the ML is as follows:=20 The WG supports the adoption of this I-D as the starting point of specifying this capability for Proxy Mobile IPv6. Chairs request the authors to submit the I-D as the Netext WG document. -Raj From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri Aug 19 13:00:00 2011 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 94BA321F85FF for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 13:00:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.637 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.637 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.038, 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 SjNbbz8VEg79 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 13:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-sa02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B62C321F8610 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 12:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh104.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.30]) by mgw-sa02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p7JK0tJa003013 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:00:56 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.5]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:00:55 +0300 Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.61) by NOK-am1MHUB-01.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 22:00:55 +0200 Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-051.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.86]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.002; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 22:00:55 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: Conclusion of consensus call to adopt draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHMXqqzQbALLhwmdU+5R8a37L++Cg== Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:00:54 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 x-originating-ip: [172.19.59.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 20:00:55.0949 (UTC) FILETIME=[B4E883D0:01CC5EAA] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Subject: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-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: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:00:00 -0000 The consensus call in the Netext WG to specify a new option to carry additional information about the access network has concluded. The I-D " Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6", Which describes this capability was presented at IETF81. The URL to the consensus call for working on this feature and adopting this I-D as the WG baseline is at: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02072.html The conclusion drawn from the consensus call on the ML and the room at the IETF81-WG meeting is as follows: There is general agreement that this option is useful and rough consensus on adopting the I-D draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the WG baseline. Chairs request the authors to submit the I-D as WG document. -Raj From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Fri Aug 19 14:10:20 2011 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 11E0C21F8B4A for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:10:20 -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 JZ-RjaCSinkK for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C8D321F8B47 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bkar4 with SMTP id r4so2977232bka.31 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:11:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=sbLV1FP6sLCoUvEiFRI+XIQxbslho5w+BnRxmYaPK24=; b=B5+POKdgZpHsJQgFn9Q0w/CdQVVmQO3ms4BXRBIJV/UrV1DI62NifktO3/YVA0IQPF mheFspMmSUG+Pfcm2gev5OEPoWjgJ7HEWJPCYJ0QwqTP7afCbcY9eK+IyFGIhoNV58ln Zr7+vq36JYEyUwNHFh6STMqALzBrvsfbLjj4c= Received: by 10.204.152.153 with SMTP id g25mr67535bkw.285.1313788268965; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.150.126.201] ([83.150.126.201]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r24sm1149457bkr.59.2011.08.19.14.11.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: jouni korhonen In-Reply-To: <4E4E6A1D.70302@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:11:04 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4E0D0C6B-1A81-4330-A9ED-873A2E8F4088@gmail.com> <4E4E6A1D.70302@gmail.com> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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, 19 Aug 2011 21:10:20 -0000 Alex, FWIW is to make sure prefix delegation works when the MN in a RR role = uses DHCPv6-PD to get its prefixes. It looks straight forward but there = are few things to clarify in general operation and PBU/PBA signaling: = what happens after a handover as the new MAG needs to learn delegated = prefixes to setup a proper forwarding state, and how DHCPv6 (relay in a = MAG) and LMA coordinate delegated prefixes to get the delegation work ok = & establish proper forwarding state... etc. There might be other cases and solutions but the above stuff is actually = needed.. - Jouni On Aug 19, 2011, at 4:50 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > Le 18/08/2011 23:52, Jouni a =E9crit : >>=20 >> It is about providing mobility for delegated prefixes. >=20 > Thanks Jouni. Is it for an MR? If yes, then there may exist other = solutions possible as well. Have you considered them? >=20 > Alex >=20 >>=20 >> - Jouni (as a co-author) >>=20 >>=20 >> On Aug 19, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Jong-Hyouk Lee wrote: >>=20 >>> Hi, Sri. >>>=20 >>> Thanks for sharing your opinions. I would like to also hear a reply = from Joy. Joy, could you clearly state your views on the question from = Alex? >>>=20 >>> Cheers. >>>=20 >>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Sri Gundavelli = wrote: >>>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per = definition is >>>> CMIP enabled. >>>=20 >>> To ensure the terminology is right: >>>=20 >>> Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the = network >>> elements behind the mobile node >>>=20 >>> Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility elements on = the >>> MN-AR access link. These are not delegated prefixes. An IP host = behind the >>> mobile node cannot use this prefix to generate an address, it wont = receive >>> RA's with these PIO's. >>>=20 >>> HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling plane. = If DHCP >>> PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining prefixes, those are = simple >>> IP prefixes. However, if mobility is provided to those prefixes, in = the form >>> of this draft, we can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided = and those >>> prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective. >>>=20 >>> MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have = implied, as >>> mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev mail. But, probably = NEMO is >>> a generic term. Any case, the distinction is understood, with or = without >>> CMIP ... >>>=20 >>> Sri >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Alex: >>>>=20 >>>> If I may comment. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the = goal of >>>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>>>=20 >>>> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >>>>=20 >>>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to = assign >>>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>>>=20 >>>> Assigning HNP to mobile =3D mobility + delegated prefix (Same as = #1) >>>>=20 >>>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router =3D RFC3963. NEMO MR per = definition is >>>> CMIP enabled. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> So, the draft is supporting #1. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Sri >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru = Petrescu" >>>> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Hello Raj, >>>>>=20 >>>>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a =E9crit : >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation = for >>>>>> Proxy Mobile IPv6" >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix = delegation >>>>>> is a required feature for PMIP6. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the = goal of >>>>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>>>>=20 >>>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to = assign >>>>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>>>>=20 >>>>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP. >>>>>=20 >>>>> [...] >>>>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Question to WG: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Yes [ ] >>>>>> No [ ] >>>>>=20 >>>>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>>>>=20 >>>>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D: >>>>>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this >>>>>> feature? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Yes [ ] >>>>>> No [ ] >>>>>=20 >>>>> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>>>>=20 >>>>> I hope this helps. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Alex >>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> -Chairs >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic = at: >>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> netext mailing list >>>>>> netext@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> netext mailing list >>>>> netext@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>>=20 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> netext mailing list >>>> netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> -- >>> IMARA Team, INRIA, France. >>> Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random. >>>=20 >>> #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria = (dot) fr >>> #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netext mailing list >>> netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Sat Aug 20 06:52:42 2011 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 3046821F8661 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 06:52:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.116 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.116 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, 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 At2fZiUVb8Ol for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 06:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB9521F85A3 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 06:52:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E92FD94001B; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:53:33 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4FBC5B.9030504@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:53:31 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jouni korhonen References: <4E0D0C6B-1A81-4330-A9ED-873A2E8F4088@gmail.com> <4E4E6A1D.70302@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110820-0, 20/08/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6? 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: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 13:52:42 -0000 Le 19/08/2011 23:11, jouni korhonen a écrit : > > Alex, > > FWIW is to make sure prefix delegation works when the MN in a RR > role uses DHCPv6-PD to get its prefixes. MN in a RR role? Is the MN going to use the delegated prefix as an HNP? Alex > It looks straight forward but there are few things to clarify in > general operation and PBU/PBA signaling: what happens after a > handover as the new MAG needs to learn delegated prefixes to setup a > proper forwarding state, and how DHCPv6 (relay in a MAG) and LMA > coordinate delegated prefixes to get the delegation work ok& > establish proper forwarding state... etc. > > There might be other cases and solutions but the above stuff is > actually needed.. > > - Jouni > > > > On Aug 19, 2011, at 4:50 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > >> Le 18/08/2011 23:52, Jouni a écrit : >>> >>> It is about providing mobility for delegated prefixes. >> >> Thanks Jouni. Is it for an MR? If yes, then there may exist >> other solutions possible as well. Have you considered them? >> >> Alex >> >>> >>> - Jouni (as a co-author) >>> >>> >>> On Aug 19, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Jong-Hyouk Lee wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, Sri. >>>> >>>> Thanks for sharing your opinions. I would like to also hear a >>>> reply from Joy. Joy, could you clearly state your views on the >>>> question from Alex? >>>> >>>> Cheers. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Sri >>>> Gundavelli wrote: >>>>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR >>>>> per definition is CMIP enabled. >>>> >>>> To ensure the terminology is right: >>>> >>>> Delegated Prefix - Prefixes hosted by the mobile node, or the >>>> network elements behind the mobile node >>>> >>>> Hosted Prefixes - prefixes hosted by the PMIPv6 mobility >>>> elements on the MN-AR access link. These are not delegated >>>> prefixes. An IP host behind the mobile node cannot use this >>>> prefix to generate an address, it wont receive RA's with these >>>> PIO's. >>>> >>>> HNP typically implied prefixes delivered on PMIPv6 signaling >>>> plane. If DHCP PD is used by MN or a node behind for obtaining >>>> prefixes, those are simple IP prefixes. However, if mobility >>>> is provided to those prefixes, in the form of this draft, we >>>> can group them as HNP's, as mobility is provided and those >>>> prefixes are anchored on the LMA, from routing perspective. >>>> >>>> MN/MR Distinction is clear I assume. But, NEMO MR, I may have >>>> implied, as mobile router with CMIP functionality in my prev >>>> mail. But, probably NEMO is a generic term. Any case, the >>>> distinction is understood, with or without CMIP ... >>>> >>>> Sri >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/18/11 9:14 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Alex: >>>>> >>>>> If I may comment. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is >>>>>> for the goal of >>>>> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>>>> >>>>> #1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes >>>>> >>>>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not >>>>>> necessarily to assign >>>>> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The two goals are distinctive >>>>> IMHO. >>>>> >>>>> Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same >>>>> as #1) >>>>> >>>>> #2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR >>>>> per definition is CMIP enabled. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, the draft is supporting #1. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sri >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru >>>>> Petrescu" wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello Raj, >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix >>>>>>> Delegation for Proxy Mobile >>>>>>> IPv6" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that >>>>>>> prefix delegation is a required feature for PMIP6. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is >>>>>> for the goal of supporting Network Mobility with PMIP? >>>>>> >>>>>> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not >>>>>> necessarily to assign MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)? The >>>>>> two goals are distinctive IMHO. >>>>>> >>>>>> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for >>>>>> PMIP. >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Question to WG: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for >>>>>>> PMIP6? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router. >>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in >>>>>>> I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting >>>>>>> point of this feature? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes [ ] No [ ] >>>>>> >>>>>> No, unless the problem is clearer. >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope this helps. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alex >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Chairs >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on >>>>>>> this topic at: >>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ netext >>>>>>> mailing list netext@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ netext >>>>>> mailing list netext@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ netext >>>>> mailing list netext@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>>> list netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- IMARA Team, INRIA, France. Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere >>>> between /dev/null and /dev/random. >>>> >>>> #email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) >>>> inria (dot) fr #webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/ >>>> _______________________________________________ netext >>>> mailing list netext@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>> >>> _______________________________________________ netext mailing >>> list netext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ netext mailing list >> netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sat Aug 20 12:06:12 2011 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 A5BC021F8ABB; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 12:06:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.587 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.012, 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 4hjNWdyeZOwa; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 12:06:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 484E221F8A6F; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 12:06:12 -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: 3.59 Message-ID: <20110820190612.21794.38521.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 12:06:12 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-redirect-09.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: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 19:06:12 -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 : Runtime LMA Assignment Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Author(s) : Jouni Korhonen Sri Gundavelli Hidetoshi Yokota Xiangsong Cui Filename : draft-ietf-netext-redirect-09.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2011-08-20 This document describes a runtime Local Mobility Anchor assignment functionality and corresponding mobility options for Proxy Mobile IPv6. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-redirect-09.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-redirect-09.txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Aug 22 07:49:14 2011 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 DB6A821F85B1; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:49:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.546 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, 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 94PbuiYpgSh3; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:49:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418CC21F853E; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:49:14 -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: 3.59 Message-ID: <20110822144914.32742.92799.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:49:14 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-00.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, 22 Aug 2011 14:49:15 -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 Filename : draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-00.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2011-08-22 This document explains how network mobility and DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation works with Proxy Mobile IPv6. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-00.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-00.txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Aug 22 10:24:06 2011 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 EE4A821F8B72; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:24:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, 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 tghJz82yu98F; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F14B421F8B7D; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:24:00 -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: 3.59 Message-ID: <20110822172358.21843.62475.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:23:58 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-00.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, 22 Aug 2011 17:24:06 -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 : IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IP= v6 Author(s) : Sri Gundavelli Xingyue Zhou Jouni Korhonen Rajeev Koodli Filename : draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-00.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2011-08-22 This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IPv4 Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the received offload flow selectors from the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IPv4 flows. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-0= 0.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-sipto-option-00= .txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Aug 22 10:52:54 2011 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 3E44921F8C1D; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:52:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, 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 um7yB4EVaeia; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D03B021F8C12; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:52:53 -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: 3.59 Message-ID: <20110822175253.28092.19611.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:52:53 -0700 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-access-network-option-00.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, 22 Aug 2011 17:52:54 -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 : Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Author(s) : Sri Gundavelli Jouni Korhonen Mark Grayson Kent Leung Rajesh Pazhyannur Filename : draft-ietf-netext-access-network-option-00.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2011-08-22 This specification defines a mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying the access network identifier and the access operator identification information from the mobile access gateway to the local mobility anchor over Proxy Mobile IPv6. Based on the received information, the local mobility anchor is able to provide access network and access operator specific handling or policing for the mobile node traffic. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netext-access-network-option= -00.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-access-network-option-= 00.txt