From jari.arkko@piuha.net Tue Jan 11 02:51:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E370D28C11B; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 02:51:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.54 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6gp0Pd9rj5DB; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 02:51:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146DE28C114; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 02:51:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40BC2CC2F; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 12:54:04 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xyEwHihhGT38; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 12:54:03 +0200 (EET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E93EF2CC2D; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 12:54:02 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <4D2C36CA.3040008@piuha.net> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 12:54:02 +0200 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mext@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------050005070408030106000604" Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: [dmm] suggest charter item for distributed mobility work X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 10:51:54 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050005070408030106000604 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All, I have been thinking about what to do about the distributed mobility work since our meeting in Beijing. My suggestion is to add a work item to the MEXT charter. Here's the proposed new item: Jari --------------050005070408030106000604 Content-Type: text/plain; name="charterjan2011withdmm.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="charterjan2011withdmm.txt" Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 (mext) ----------------------------------- Current Status: Active Chairs: Marcelo Bagnulo Julien Laganier Internet Area Directors: Ralph Droms Jari Arkko Internet Area Advisor: Jari Arkko Mailing Lists: General Discussion: mext@ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext Description of Working Group: Mobile IPv6 specifies routing support which permits an IPv6 host to continue using its home address as it moves around the Internet, enabling continuity of sessions. Mobile IPv6 supports transparency above the IP layer, including maintenance of active transport level sessions. In addition, network mobility (NEMO) mechanisms built on top of Mobile IPv6 allow managing the mobility of an entire network, as it changes its point of attachment to the Internet. The base specifications consist of: o RFC 3775 (Mobile IPv6) o RFC 3963 (NEMO) o RFC 4877 (Mobile IPv6 Operation with IKEv2) o RFC 5555 (Dual Stack Mobile IPv6) o RFC 5648 (Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration) o RFC 5846 (Binding Revocation) o RFC-to-be (Flow Binding Policy Transport and Flow Binding Policy Format) The MEXT Working Group continues the work of the former MIP6, NEMO, and MONAMI6 Working Groups. The primary goal of MEXT will be to enhance base IPv6 mobility by continuing work on developments that are required for wide-scale deployments and specific deployment scenarios. Additionally, the working group will ensure that any issues identified by implementation and interoperability experience are addressed, and that the base specifications are maintained. The group will also produce informational documentation, such as design rationale documents or description of specific issues within the protocol. The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing standard track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative solutions will be published as experimental RFCs. The working group will also work on operational considerations on setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol mechanisms to select the closest home agents for new clients. In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier work on prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications. Work items related to base specification maintenance include: Create and maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of implementation and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with specific updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known specific issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addresses, negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. Goals and Milestones: Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for publication as Informational. Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard. Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for publication as Experimental. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for distributed use of Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG for publication as a proposed standard. --------------050005070408030106000604 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1; name="charterjan2011withdmm-from-.diff.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="charterjan2011withdmm-from-.diff.html" Diff: charterjan2011.txt - charterjan2011withdmm.txt
 charterjan2011.txt   charterjan2011withdmm.txt 
skipping to change at line 60 skipping to change at line 60
specific issues within the protocol. specific issues within the protocol.
The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security
mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing standard mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing standard
track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement
mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different
implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more
experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative solutions will experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative solutions will
be published as experimental RFCs. be published as experimental RFCs.
The working group will also work on operational considerations on
setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed
in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol mechanisms
to select the closest home agents for new clients.
In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier work on In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier work on
prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6
operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications. operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications.
Work items related to base specification maintenance include: Create and Work items related to base specification maintenance include: Create and
maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of implementation maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of implementation
and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with specific and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with specific
updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known specific updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known specific
issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addresses, issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addresses,
negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and
discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks.
Goals and Milestones: Goals and Milestones:
Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Vendor Specific Option' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for publication as Informational.
Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Experimental Allocations' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard.
Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Dual-Stack Operation' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard.
Done - Submit I-D 'Motivation for Authentication I-D' to IESG for publication as Informational.
Done - Submit Multiple CoA Registration to IESG
Done - Submit I-D 'Goals for AAA HA Interface' to IESG for publication as Informational.
Done - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization Needs for Automobile and Highway Deployments
Done - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization Needs for Aircraft and Spacecraft Deployments
Done - Submit I-D 'Mobility Header Home Agent Switch Message' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard
Done - Submit final doc on Route Optimization Needs for Aircraft and Spacecraft Deployments, for Informational
Done - Submit 00 draft on Binding Revocation
Done - Submit the final doc on MIB for NEMO Basic Support to the IESG, for Proposed Standard
Done - Submit draft on Binding Revocation to IESG
Done - Submit I-D(s) related to specific updates and corrections of RFC 3775 to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.
Done - Submit the final doc on Prefix Delegation for NEMO to the IESG, for Proposed Standard
Dec 2010 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG for publication as a proposed standard.
Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for publication as Informational.
Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard.
Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for publication as Experimental. Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for publication as Experimental.
Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.
Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.
Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for distributed use of Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational
Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.
Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG for publication as a proposed standard.
 End of changes. 4 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 8 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/
--------------050005070408030106000604-- From sgundave@cisco.com Wed Jan 19 19:11:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B463A7098; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:11:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.399, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PfejFldhAKWa; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:11:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06A543A7099; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:11:19 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjgFANA2N02rR7Ht/2dsb2JhbACCQaEqX3OiFZp5hVAEhG89hXKDKoJz Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Jan 2011 03:13:59 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p0K3Dxp7021192; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 03:13:59 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-21b.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.143]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:13:59 -0800 Received: from 10.32.246.211 ([10.32.246.211]) by xmb-sjc-21b.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.143]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 03:13:59 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.28.0.101117 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:14:06 -0800 From: Sri Gundavelli To: Jari Arkko , "mext@ietf.org" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [MEXT] suggest charter item for distributed mobility work Thread-Index: Acu4UBic4/afIk6erka9FoImdwJyrQ== In-Reply-To: <4D2C36CA.3040008@piuha.net> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3378309246_16548777" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jan 2011 03:13:59.0921 (UTC) FILETIME=[14FCFE10:01CBB850] Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dmm] [MEXT] suggest charter item for distributed mobility work X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 03:11:46 -0000 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3378309246_16548777 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Hi Jari: Thanks for the updated charter text. This looks good to me. Just couple of comments. * The approach of closest home agent selection is one aspect of the DMM proposal. I assumed it includes other aspects such as CP/DP separation. Does the charter text gives such provision for such extensions ? * The BOF discussed the chained models around CMIP/PMIP mobility domains and the optimized routing paths in such context. The potential extensions should be applicable to both client-based/network-based and chained mobility models. * There were some issues that were raised around CP/DP separation and around the distributed deployment models. There should be analysis on the issues around such deployment models, in relation to centralized models that are deployed today. If the charter text broadly allows for some work around this, probably it should be fine. Finally, glad to see this work not defining a new protocol suite. But bringing value to the existing protocols. Regards Sri On 1/11/11 2:54 AM, "Jari Arkko" wrote: > All, > > I have been thinking about what to do about the distributed mobility > work since our meeting in Beijing. My suggestion is to add a work item > to the MEXT charter. Here's the proposed new item: > > Jari > > > Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 (mext) > ----------------------------------- > > Current Status: Active > > Chairs: > Marcelo Bagnulo > Julien Laganier > > Internet Area Directors: > Ralph Droms > Jari Arkko > > Internet Area Advisor: > Jari Arkko > > Mailing Lists: > General Discussion: mext@ietf.org > To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext > > Description of Working Group: > > Mobile IPv6 specifies routing support which permits an IPv6 host to > continue using its home address as it moves around the Internet, > enabling continuity of sessions. Mobile IPv6 supports transparency above > the IP layer, including maintenance of active transport level sessions. > In addition, network mobility (NEMO) mechanisms built on top of Mobile > IPv6 allow managing the mobility of an entire network, as it changes its > point of attachment to the Internet. The base specifications consist of: > > o RFC 3775 (Mobile IPv6) > o RFC 3963 (NEMO) > o RFC 4877 (Mobile IPv6 Operation with IKEv2) > o RFC 5555 (Dual Stack Mobile IPv6) > o RFC 5648 (Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration) > o RFC 5846 (Binding Revocation) > o RFC-to-be (Flow Binding Policy Transport and Flow Binding Policy Format) > > The MEXT Working Group continues the work of the former MIP6, NEMO, and > MONAMI6 Working Groups. > > The primary goal of MEXT will be to enhance base IPv6 mobility by > continuing work on developments that are required for wide-scale > deployments and specific deployment scenarios. Additionally, the working > group will ensure that any issues identified by implementation and > interoperability experience are addressed, and that the base > specifications are maintained. The group will also produce informational > documentation, such as design rationale documents or description of > specific issues within the protocol. > > The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security > mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing standard > track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement > mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different > implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more > experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative solutions will > be published as experimental RFCs. > > The working group will also work on operational considerations on > setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed > in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol mechanisms > to select the closest home agents for new clients. > > In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier work on > prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 > operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications. > > Work items related to base specification maintenance include: Create and > maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of implementation > and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with specific > updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known specific > issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addresses, > negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and > discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. > > > Goals and Milestones: > Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for > publication as Informational. > Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a > Proposed Standard. > Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for > publication as Experimental. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for > publication as Proposed Standard. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' > to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for distributed use of > Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational > Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to > IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG for > publication as a proposed standard. > > > > charterjan2011.txt charterjan2011withdmm.txt > > skipping to change at line 60 skipping to change at line 60 > specific issues within the protocol. specific issues within the protocol. > > The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security The MEXT > WG will also explore experimental alternative security > mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing standard > mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing standard > track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement track > RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement > mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different mechanism > that guarantees interoperability between different > implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more > implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more > experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative solutions will > experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative solutions will > be published as experimental RFCs. be published as experimental RFCs. > > > The working group will also work on operational considerations on > setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed > in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol mechanisms > to select the closest home agents for new clients. > > In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier work on In > addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier work on > prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 > prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 > operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications. > operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications. > > Work items related to base specification maintenance include: Create and > Work items related to base specification maintenance include: Create and > maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of implementation > maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of implementation > and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with specific and > interoperability experience. Address specific issues with specific > updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known specific > updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known specific > issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addresses, > issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addresses, > negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and > negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and > discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. discovery of > the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. > > Goals and Milestones: Goals and Milestones: > > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Vendor Specific Option' to IESG for > publication as a Proposed Standard Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 > Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for publication as Informational. > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Experimental Allocations' to IESG for > publication as a Proposed Standard Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent > reliability' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard. > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Dual-Stack Operation' to IESG for > publication as a Proposed Standard. > Done - Submit I-D 'Motivation for Authentication I-D' to IESG for > publication as Informational. > Done - Submit Multiple CoA Registration to IESG > Done - Submit I-D 'Goals for AAA HA Interface' to IESG for publication > as Informational. > Done - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization Needs for Automobile and > Highway Deployments > Done - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization Needs for Aircraft and > Spacecraft Deployments > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobility Header Home Agent Switch Message' to IESG > for publication as a Proposed Standard > Done - Submit final doc on Route Optimization Needs for Aircraft and > Spacecraft Deployments, for Informational > Done - Submit 00 draft on Binding Revocation > Done - Submit the final doc on MIB for NEMO Basic Support to the IESG, > for Proposed Standard > Done - Submit draft on Binding Revocation to IESG > Done - Submit I-D(s) related to specific updates and corrections of RFC > 3775 to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Done - Submit the final doc on Prefix Delegation for NEMO to the IESG, > for Proposed Standard > Dec 2010 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG for > publication as a proposed standard. > Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for > publication as Informational. > Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a > Proposed Standard. > Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for > publication as Experimental. Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security > mechanisms to the IESG for publication as Experimental. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for > publication as Proposed Standard. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 > address support' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' > to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home > agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as > Proposed Standard. > > Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for distributed use of > Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational > Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to > IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Dec 2011 - Submit I-D > 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to IESG for publication as > Proposed Standard. > > Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG for > publication as a proposed standard. > > End of changes. 4 change blocks. > 18 lines changed or deleted 8 lines changed or added > This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is available > from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/ > > _______________________________________________ > MEXT mailing list > MEXT@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext --B_3378309246_16548777 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [MEXT] suggest charter item for distributed mobility work</TITLE= > </HEAD> <BODY> <FONT FACE=3D"Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt= '>Hi Jari:<BR> <BR> Thanks for the updated charter text. This looks good to me. Just couple of = comments. <BR> <BR> </SPAN></FONT><UL><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN= STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>The approach of closest home agent selection is one = aspect of the DMM proposal. I assumed it includes other aspects such as CP/D= P separation.  Does the charter text gives such provision for such exte= nsions ? </SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STY= LE=3D'font-size:11pt'>The BOF discussed the chained models around CMIP/PMIP mo= bility domains and the optimized routing paths in such context. The potentia= l extensions should be applicable to both client-based/network-based and cha= ined mobility models. </SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STY= LE=3D'font-size:11pt'>There were some issues that were raised around CP/DP sep= aration and around the distributed deployment models. There should be analys= is on the issues around such deployment models, in relation to centralized m= odels that are deployed today.<BR> </SPAN></FONT></UL><FONT FACE=3D"Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN ST= YLE=3D'font-size:11pt'><BR> If the charter text broadly allows for some work around this, probably it s= hould be fine. Finally, glad to see this work not defining a new protocol su= ite. But bringing value to the existing protocols.<BR> <BR> <BR> Regards<BR> Sri<BR> <BR> <BR> On 1/11/11 2:54 AM, "Jari Arkko" <<a href=3D"jari.arkko@piuha.ne= t">jari.arkko@piuha.net</a>> wrote:<BR> <BR> </SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Consolas, Courier New,= Courier"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:10pt'>All,<BR> <BR> I have been thinking about what to do about the distributed mobility <BR> work since our meeting in Beijing. My suggestion is to add a work item <BR> to the MEXT charter. Here's the proposed new item:<BR> <BR> Jari<BR> <BR> <HR ALIGN=3DCENTER SIZE=3D"3" WIDTH=3D"95%">Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 (mext)<B= R> -----------------------------------<BR> <BR>  Current Status: Active<BR> <BR>  Chairs:<BR>      Marcelo Bagnulo <<a href=3D"marcelo@it.uc3m.= es">marcelo@it.uc3m.es</a>><BR>      Julien Laganier <<a href=3D"julienl@qualcomm= .com">julienl@qualcomm.com</a>><BR> <BR>  Internet Area Directors:<BR>      Ralph Droms <<a href=3D"rdroms.ietf@gmail.co= m">rdroms.ietf@gmail.com</a>><BR>      Jari Arkko <<a href=3D"jari.arkko@piuha.net"= >jari.arkko@piuha.net</a>><BR> <BR>  Internet Area Advisor:<BR>      Jari Arkko <<a href=3D"jari.arkko@piuha.net"= >jari.arkko@piuha.net</a>><BR> <BR>  Mailing Lists:<BR>      General Discussion: <a href=3D"mext@ietf.org">m= ext@ietf.org</a><BR>      To Subscribe:      &= nbsp;<a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext">https://www.ietf.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/mext</a><BR>      Archive:       =      <a href=3D"http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/= mext">http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext</a><BR> <BR> Description of Working Group:<BR> <BR>   Mobile IPv6 specifies routing support which permits an IPv6 hos= t to<BR>   continue using its home address as it moves around the Internet= ,<BR>   enabling continuity of sessions. Mobile IPv6 supports transpare= ncy above<BR>   the IP layer, including maintenance of active transport level s= essions.<BR>   In addition, network mobility (NEMO) mechanisms built on top of= Mobile<BR>   IPv6 allow managing the mobility of an entire network, as it ch= anges its<BR>   point of attachment to the Internet. The base specifications co= nsist of:<BR> <BR>   o RFC 3775 (Mobile IPv6)<BR>   o RFC 3963 (NEMO)<BR>   o RFC 4877 (Mobile IPv6 Operation with IKEv2)<BR>   o RFC 5555 (Dual Stack Mobile IPv6)<BR>   o RFC 5648 (Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration)<BR>   o RFC 5846 (Binding Revocation)<BR>   o RFC-to-be (Flow Binding Policy Transport and Flow Binding Pol= icy Format)<BR> <BR>   The MEXT Working Group continues the work of the former MIP6, N= EMO, and<BR>   MONAMI6 Working Groups.<BR> <BR>   The primary goal of MEXT will be to enhance base IPv6 mobility = by<BR>   continuing work on developments that are required for wide-scal= e<BR>   deployments and specific deployment scenarios. Additionally, th= e working<BR>   group will ensure that any issues identified by implementation = and<BR>   interoperability experience are addressed, and that the base<BR= >   specifications are maintained. The group will also produce info= rmational<BR>   documentation, such as design rationale documents or descriptio= n of<BR>   specific issues within the protocol.<BR> <BR>   The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security= <BR>   mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing st= andard<BR>   track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to imple= ment<BR>   mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different<BR= >   implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or mor= e<BR>   experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative soluti= ons will<BR>   be published as experimental RFCs.<BR> <BR>   The working group will also work on operational considerations = on<BR>   setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed = <BR>   in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol mech= anisms<BR>   to select the closest home agents for new clients.<BR> <BR>   In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier= work on<BR>   prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS  support for Mobile IPv= 6, Mobile IPv6<BR>   operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specificat= ions.<BR> <BR>   Work items related to base specification maintenance include: C= reate and<BR>   maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of impleme= ntation<BR>   and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with s= pecific<BR>   updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known= specific<BR>   issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addr= esses,<BR>   negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and= <BR>   discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks.<BR> <BR> <BR> Goals and Milestones:<BR>   Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to= IESG for publication as Informational.<BR>   Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publ= ication as a Proposed Standard.<BR>   Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to th= e IESG for publication as Experimental.<BR>   Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IES= G for publication as Proposed Standard.<BR>   Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networ= ks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.<BR>   Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for distribut= ed use of Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational<BR>   Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payloa= d traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.<BR>   Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG = for publication as a proposed standard.<BR> <BR> <HR ALIGN=3DCENTER SIZE=3D"3" WIDTH=3D"95%"></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Cali= bri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'>   &n= bsp;        <BR>  charterjan2011.txt   charterjan2011withdmm.txt   = <BR>   <BR> skipping to change at<I> line 60</I> skipping to change at<I> line 60</I> <= BR>   specific issues within the protocol.   specific issue= s within the protocol. <BR>   <BR>   The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security=   The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security= <BR>   mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing st= andard   mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the exist= ing standard <BR>   track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to imple= ment   track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to i= mplement <BR>   mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different &n= bsp; mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different <BR>   implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or mor= e   implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or mo= re <BR>   experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative soluti= ons will   experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternativ= e solutions will <BR>   be published as experimental RFCs.   be published as = experimental RFCs. <BR>   <BR>  <BR>    The working group will also work on operational considera= tions on <BR>    setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distri= buted <BR>    in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protoco= l mechanisms <BR>    to select the closest home agents for new clients. <BR>             &nb= sp;            &= nbsp;            = ;            &nb= sp;            &= nbsp;           <BR>   In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier= work on   In addition, the working group will bring to completion= earlier work on <BR>   prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS  support for Mobile IPv= 6, Mobile IPv6   prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS  support = for Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 <BR>   operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specificat= ions.   operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability speci= fications. <BR>   <BR>   Work items related to base specification maintenance include: C= reate and   Work items related to base specification maintenance i= nclude: Create and <BR>   maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of impleme= ntation   maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of = implementation <BR>   and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with s= pecific   and interoperability experience. Address specific issues= with specific <BR>   updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known= specific   updates or revisions of the base specification. Curren= tly known specific <BR>   issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home addr= esses,   issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 hom= e addresses, <BR>   negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and=   negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and= <BR>   discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. &nbs= p; discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. <BR>   <BR> Goals and Milestones: Goals and Milestones: <BR>  <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Vendor S= pecific Option' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard   J= un 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for publ= ication as Informational. <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Experime= ntal Allocations' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard   = ;Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a= Proposed Standard. <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Dual-Sta= ck Operation' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard.  <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D 'Motivation for Authe= ntication I-D' to IESG for publication as Informational.  <BR>   Done     - Submit Multiple CoA Registration= to IESG  <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D 'Goals for AAA HA Int= erface' to IESG for publication as Informational.  <BR>   Done     - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimi= zation Needs for Automobile and Highway Deployments  <BR>   Done     - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimi= zation Needs for Aircraft and Spacecraft Deployments  <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D 'Mobility Header Home= Agent Switch Message' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard  = <BR>   Done     - Submit final doc on Route Optimi= zation Needs for Aircraft and Spacecraft Deployments, for Informational &nbs= p;<BR>   Done     - Submit 00 draft on Binding Revoc= ation  <BR>   Done     - Submit the final doc on MIB for = NEMO Basic Support to the IESG, for Proposed Standard  <BR>   Done     - Submit draft on Binding Revocati= on to IESG  <BR>   Done     - Submit I-D(s) related to specifi= c updates and corrections of RFC 3775 to IESG for publication as Proposed St= andard.  <BR>   Done     - Submit the final doc on Prefix D= elegation for NEMO to the IESG, for Proposed Standard  <BR>   Dec 2010 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG = for publication as a proposed standard.  <BR>   Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to= IESG for publication as Informational.  <BR>   Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publ= ication as a Proposed Standard.  <BR>   Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to th= e IESG for publication as Experimental.   Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds o= n alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for publication as Experimenta= l. <BR>   Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IES= G for publication as Proposed Standard.   Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'O= verlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standar= d. <BR>   Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networ= ks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.   Sep 2= 011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only networks via DHCP' to IE= SG for publication as Proposed Standard. <BR>  <BR>    Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for dis= tributed use of Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational <BR>   Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payloa= d traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard.   Dec 201= 1 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' to IESG f= or publication as Proposed Standard. <BR>  <BR>    Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to= IESG for publication as a proposed standard.  <BR>   <BR>  End of changes. 4 change blocks.  <BR> <I>18 lines changed or deleted 8 lines changed or added</I> <BR> </SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:11pt'><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, = Arial">This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is av= ailable from <a href=3D"http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/">http://w= ww.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/</a> </FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Calibri, Verdana= , Helvetica, Arial">   <BR> <HR ALIGN=3DCENTER SIZE=3D"3" WIDTH=3D"95%"></FONT></SPAN><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FA= CE=3D"Consolas, Courier New, Courier"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:10pt'>___________= ____________________________________<BR> MEXT mailing list<BR> <a href=3D"MEXT@ietf.org">MEXT@ietf.org</a><BR> <a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext">https://www.ietf.org/m= ailman/listinfo/mext</a><BR> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE> </BODY> </HTML> --B_3378309246_16548777-- From jari.arkko@piuha.net Thu Jan 20 10:22:40 2011 Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net> X-Original-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE4B3A704B; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:22:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.533 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qg6WUCY7wNtV; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:22:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D35FC3A7048; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:22:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888A72CC31; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:25:18 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ILHUFyjDap5t; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:25:17 +0200 (EET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C5932CC2D; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:25:15 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <4D387E0C.8070200@piuha.net> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:25:16 +0200 From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> References: <C95CE87E.D35B%sgundave@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <C95CE87E.D35B%sgundave@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dmm@ietf.org, "mext@ietf.org" <mext@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [dmm] [MEXT] suggest charter item for distributed mobility work X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management <dmm.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmm> List-Post: <mailto:dmm@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:22:40 -0000 Sri, > Thanks for the updated charter text. This looks good to me. Just > couple of comments. > > * The approach of closest home agent selection is one aspect of > the DMM proposal. I assumed it includes other aspects such as > CP/DP separation. Does the charter text gives such provision > for such extensions ? > Yes. Its says "for instance". > * The BOF discussed the chained models around CMIP/PMIP mobility > domains and the optimized routing paths in such context. The > potential extensions should be applicable to both > client-based/network-based and chained mobility models. > I think anything in the area of operational guidance, or usage of existing protocols to do some form of distribution or optimized route paths would be fair game, IMO. > * There were some issues that were raised around CP/DP separation > and around the distributed deployment models. There should be > analysis on the issues around such deployment models, in > relation to centralized models that are deployed today. > Again, I think this is included. But I would rather not write all of this to the charter explicitly; we might miss some issues that we will in any case have to deal with in the documents. > If the charter text broadly allows for some work around this, probably > it should be fine. Finally, glad to see this work not defining a new > protocol suite. But bringing value to the existing protocols. Right. Jari > > > Regards > Sri > > > On 1/11/11 2:54 AM, "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote: > > All, > > I have been thinking about what to do about the distributed mobility > work since our meeting in Beijing. My suggestion is to add a work > item > to the MEXT charter. Here's the proposed new item: > > Jari > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 (mext) > ----------------------------------- > > Current Status: Active > > Chairs: > Marcelo Bagnulo <marcelo@it.uc3m.es> > Julien Laganier <julienl@qualcomm.com> > > Internet Area Directors: > Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> > Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> > > Internet Area Advisor: > Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> > > Mailing Lists: > General Discussion: mext@ietf.org > To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext > > Description of Working Group: > > Mobile IPv6 specifies routing support which permits an IPv6 host to > continue using its home address as it moves around the Internet, > enabling continuity of sessions. Mobile IPv6 supports > transparency above > the IP layer, including maintenance of active transport level > sessions. > In addition, network mobility (NEMO) mechanisms built on top of > Mobile > IPv6 allow managing the mobility of an entire network, as it > changes its > point of attachment to the Internet. The base specifications > consist of: > > o RFC 3775 (Mobile IPv6) > o RFC 3963 (NEMO) > o RFC 4877 (Mobile IPv6 Operation with IKEv2) > o RFC 5555 (Dual Stack Mobile IPv6) > o RFC 5648 (Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration) > o RFC 5846 (Binding Revocation) > o RFC-to-be (Flow Binding Policy Transport and Flow Binding > Policy Format) > > The MEXT Working Group continues the work of the former MIP6, > NEMO, and > MONAMI6 Working Groups. > > The primary goal of MEXT will be to enhance base IPv6 mobility by > continuing work on developments that are required for wide-scale > deployments and specific deployment scenarios. Additionally, the > working > group will ensure that any issues identified by implementation and > interoperability experience are addressed, and that the base > specifications are maintained. The group will also produce > informational > documentation, such as design rationale documents or description of > specific issues within the protocol. > > The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security > mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing > standard > track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to implement > mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different > implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more > experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative > solutions will > be published as experimental RFCs. > > The working group will also work on operational considerations on > setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed > in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol > mechanisms > to select the closest home agents for new clients. > > In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier > work on > prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, > Mobile IPv6 > operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability specifications. > > Work items related to base specification maintenance include: > Create and > maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of > implementation > and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with > specific > updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known > specific > issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home > addresses, > negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and > discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. > > > Goals and Milestones: > Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to > IESG for publication as Informational. > Jun 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for > publication as a Proposed Standard. > Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the > IESG for publication as Experimental. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG > for publication as Proposed Standard. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only > networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for > distributed use of Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational > Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload > traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG > for publication as a proposed standard. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > charterjan2011.txt charterjan2011withdmm.txt > > skipping to change at/ line 60/ skipping to change at/ line 60/ > specific issues within the protocol. specific issues within > the protocol. > > The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security > The MEXT WG will also explore experimental alternative security > mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the existing > standard mechanisms. The security mechanism specified in the > existing standard > track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory to > implement track RFCs (RFC3775bis, RFC4877) remains the mandatory > to implement > mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different > mechanism that guarantees interoperability between different > implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more > implementations. The MEXT WG is chartered to deliver one or more > experimental alternative mechanisms. All the alternative > solutions will experimental alternative mechanisms. All the > alternative solutions will > be published as experimental RFCs. be published as > experimental RFCs. > > > The working group will also work on operational considerations on > setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so that traffic is distributed > in an optimal way, for instance by using existing protocol > mechanisms > to select the closest home agents for new clients. > > In addition, the working group will bring to completion earlier > work on In addition, the working group will bring to completion > earlier work on > prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for Mobile IPv6, > Mobile IPv6 prefix delegation for NEMO, RADIUS support for > Mobile IPv6, Mobile IPv6 > operation with firewalls, and home agent reliability > specifications. operation with firewalls, and home agent > reliability specifications. > > Work items related to base specification maintenance include: > Create and Work items related to base specification maintenance > include: Create and > maintain issue lists that are generated on the basis of > implementation maintain issue lists that are generated on the > basis of implementation > and interoperability experience. Address specific issues with > specific and interoperability experience. Address specific > issues with specific > updates or revisions of the base specification. Currently known > specific updates or revisions of the base specification. > Currently known specific > issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 home > addresses, issues include support for overlapping (private) IPv4 > home addresses, > negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and > negotiation of the protection required for payload traffic, and > discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. > discovery of the home agent address in IPv4-only networks. > > Goals and Milestones: Goals and Milestones: > > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Vendor Specific Option' to > IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard Jun 2011 - Submit > I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to IESG for publication > as Informational. > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Experimental Allocations' to > IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard Jun 2011 - Submit > I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for publication as a Proposed > Standard. > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Dual-Stack Operation' to IESG > for publication as a Proposed Standard. > Done - Submit I-D 'Motivation for Authentication I-D' to > IESG for publication as Informational. > Done - Submit Multiple CoA Registration to IESG > Done - Submit I-D 'Goals for AAA HA Interface' to IESG for > publication as Informational. > Done - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization Needs for > Automobile and Highway Deployments > Done - Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization Needs for > Aircraft and Spacecraft Deployments > Done - Submit I-D 'Mobility Header Home Agent Switch > Message' to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard > Done - Submit final doc on Route Optimization Needs for > Aircraft and Spacecraft Deployments, for Informational > Done - Submit 00 draft on Binding Revocation > Done - Submit the final doc on MIB for NEMO Basic Support to > the IESG, for Proposed Standard > Done - Submit draft on Binding Revocation to IESG > Done - Submit I-D(s) related to specific updates and > corrections of RFC 3775 to IESG for publication as Proposed > Standard. > Done - Submit the final doc on Prefix Delegation for NEMO to > the IESG, for Proposed Standard > Dec 2010 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG > for publication as a proposed standard. > Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Mobile IPv6 Operation with Firewalls' to > IESG for publication as Informational. > Jan 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent reliability' to IESG for > publication as a Proposed Standard. > Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on alternative security mechanisms to the > IESG for publication as Experimental. Aug 2011 - Submit I-Ds on > alternative security mechanisms to the IESG for publication as > Experimental. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG > for publication as Proposed Standard. Sep 2011 - Submit I-D > 'Overlapping IPv4 address support' to IESG for publication as > Proposed Standard. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only > networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > Sep 2011 - Submit I-D 'Home agent discovery in IPv4-only > networks via DHCP' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > > Oct 2011 - Submit I-D 'Operational considerations for > distributed use of Mobile IPv6' for publication as Informational > Dec 2011 - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload > traffic' to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. Dec 2011 > - Submit I-D 'Negotiation of the protection for payload traffic' > to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. > > Dec 2011 - Submit the I-D 'RADIUS Mobile IPv6 Support' to IESG > for publication as a proposed standard. > > End of changes. 4 change blocks. > /18 lines changed or deleted 8 lines changed or added/ > This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is > available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > MEXT mailing list > MEXT@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext > From jari.arkko@piuha.net Thu Jan 20 10:57:36 2011 Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net> X-Original-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF5F3A6452; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:57:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZszjAG4se2id; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:57:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C1583A6407; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:57:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A6A82CC31; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:00:18 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4YDCrRPQzvhD; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:00:18 +0200 (EET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E472CC2D; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:00:17 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <4D388641.7060405@piuha.net> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:00:17 +0200 From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mext@ietf.org" <mext@ietf.org> References: <C95CE87E.D35B%sgundave@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <C95CE87E.D35B%sgundave@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dmm] [MEXT] suggest charter item for distributed mobility work X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management <dmm.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmm> List-Post: <mailto:dmm@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:57:36 -0000 The IESG has approved the change to the charter in our telechat today. Jari