From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Wed Oct 2 23:39:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA24121F9FCE for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 23:39:49 -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 MuJv5iSrHcER for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 23:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22a.google.com (mail-la0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE68621F9A4C for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 23:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ep20so1564250lab.1 for ; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 23:38:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date :to:mime-version; bh=jCVZ76Vjb6RZJdYpnlyOUqESfWZPzlUQAMJs2wIqUCY=; b=q54+qD79q4amfXEvx5xrzRgZp0fvBf7p/YELwT/NLXL65/XiHxgq8fBooz4GOVnzFA 072xa7w1Iw6pc1OSN9c5ymWR8p3tR6PnKHfvKvrCRPg6bmsXPPrN/gT8cGU84rd7FyTW oN9Qju8Dwon5Y8xWMKrQu/xZXcfyhX2GjjLgUPpu6CZZa+Uy7Y7LybDulzjnDZxdFaND pWvVkGG/zhWWkZWWeP8CebU7U6+nR5I/mHeNGrb11MmWDsOni6ce30fOMPjWEuRs5Skl hTetVMIDpdxSIb13EOOvRRi/r5PfT3ZnrWYu8Kbu1FkAPKt36vxgojiAp6/tLy/9DI9H VpJg== X-Received: by 10.112.9.195 with SMTP id c3mr726851lbb.33.1380782332781; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 23:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.250.229] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u18sm4216577lbp.4.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 02 Oct 2013 23:38:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Jouni Korhonen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 09:38:52 +0300 To: "dmm@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Subject: [DMM] IETF88 in Vancouver X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 06:39:49 -0000 Folks, We have requested for 2h WG slot for IETF88. Folks who have WG items obviously need to prepare for a status update (slide or few). If you want to present some individual I-D or topic just lets the chairs know. The usual prioritization for presentation slots is FIFO with chartered topics having preference over non-chartered topics. Jouni & Julien From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Mon Oct 7 06:03:55 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 381DA21E809A for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 06:03:55 -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 ZToixJMhmEx7 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 06:03:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x235.google.com (mail-la0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD9F21E80A6 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 06:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id el20so5434005lab.40 for ; Mon, 07 Oct 2013 06:03:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:references :to:message-id:mime-version; bh=JM894Cz9Xc4xxvfH6+BGRY/NTNXdpFM6u5FQpjti6QU=; b=Qvmljbuv2y8RAafP1JL3gCw5YMIFJGhzys1QBzYDdzlJfOc6iQOc5LYGzWWnOa+M34 JzC05g7jx4gZ7tT4spF/NVN4mRbN5mv+a4tUiS1ZFxL6YrBfuvcVLbCg4o/bxo1aHzkm GfkrVjtRYbdbEeLo1iUn8sORUCVVgdnkM2JRgZ8Is2flZiGjKyAGZNVFespG4mR2kkQq L8eqAImqdCP81SF4Fu8A8XmWayO92olL7ILhjSEiEt4uIF3Ae1kQHchY7O/SwxpWefS5 KJgJG+keLypJ+nuKU1VOEF8TrjZdEWWXKZn3QG2E9l3M0ULNKQL8HZY1nxPYfhgoe/Gg CZLw== X-Received: by 10.112.156.166 with SMTP id wf6mr25308671lbb.13.1381151033152; Mon, 07 Oct 2013 06:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.250.211] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o1sm25311705lah.8.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 07 Oct 2013 06:03:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Jouni Korhonen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 16:03:52 +0300 References: <20131004173149.22991.14931.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "dmm@ietf.org" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Subject: [DMM] Fwd: NOMCOM 2013 - Second Call for Nominations - two weeks left X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 13:03:55 -0000 FYI Begin forwarded message: > From: NomCom Chair 2013 > Subject: NOMCOM 2013 - Second Call for Nominations - two weeks left > Date: October 4, 2013 8:31:49 PM GMT+03:00 > To: IETF Announcement List > Cc: IETF Discuss List > Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org, Nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com, Chair@ietfa.amsl.com, = "2013 =20 > Nominations for the IESG, IAB, and IAOC are due to the Nomcom by = Friday, 18 October, 2013. >=20 > Is there someone you work with at IETF who has leadership potential = and a growing track record? Please read the Nomcom call for nominations = and consider nominating her or him. Or several folks! Deadline for = nominations is October 18. Nominate soon to give your nominee(s) plenty = time to fill in the questionnaire. Information about the desired = expertise for positions is here:=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2013/expertise >=20 > Lots more, including which positions are open, how to make a = nomination, and how to=20 > send us your feedback on the desired expertise, follows. >=20 > IETFers, let's hear from you! Make nominations, accept nominations! >=20 > If you have any questions about the process, feel free to get in touch = with me. >=20 > Best regards, >=20 > Allison for the Nomcom >=20 > Allison Mankin=20 > Nomcom Chair 2013-14 >=20 > ----- The Info You Need for Nominating ----- >=20 > The 2013-14 Nominating Committee (Nomcom) is seeking nominations > from now until October 18, 2013. The open positions being considered > by this year's Nomcom can be found later in this section, and also on > this year's Nomcom website:=20 >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2013/ >=20 > Nominations may be made by selecting the Nominate link at the top of > the Nomcom 2013 home page, or by visiting the following URL:=20 >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2013/nominate/ >=20 > Note that nominations made using the web tool require an ietf.org=20 > datatracker account. You can create a datatracker ietf.org account=20 > if you don't have one already by visiting the following URL: >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/accounts/create/ >=20 > Nominations may also be made by email to nomcom13 at ietf.org. > If you nominate by email, please include the word "Nominate" in the = Subject > and indicate in the email who is being nominated, their email address = (to > confirm acceptance of the nomination), and the position for which you > are making the nomination. If you use email, please use a separate = email for > each person you nominate, and for each position (if you are nominating = one > person for multiple positions). >=20 > Self-nomination is welcome! No need to be shy. >=20 > Nomcom 2013-14 will follow the policy for "Open Disclosure of Willing > Nominees" described in RFC 5680. As stated in RFC 5680: "The list of > nominees willing to be considered for positions under review in the > current Nomcom cycle is not confidential". Willing nominees for each > position will be listed in a publicly accessible way - anyone with a > datatracker account may access the lists. In all other ways, the=20 > confidentiality requirements of RFC 3777/BCP10 remain in effect. All > feedback and all Nomcom deliberations will remain confidential and = will > not be disclosed. =20 >=20 > In order to ensure time to collect sufficient community feedback about > each of the willing nominees, nominations must be received by the=20 > Nomcom on or before October 18, 2013. Please submit your nominations =20= > as early as possible for the sake of your nominees, as we've set the=20= > questionnaire submission deadline for October 25, 2013. >=20 > The list of people and posts whose terms end with the March 2014 IETF = meeting,=20 > and thus the positions for which we are accepting nominations: =20 >=20 > IAOC > Chris Griffiths >=20 > IAB > Bernard Aboba > Marc Blanchet > Ross Callon > Eliot Lear > Hannes Tschofenig >=20 > IESG > Barry Leiba (Applications) > Brian Haberman (Internet) > Benoit Claise (Operations and Management) > Gonzalo Camarillo (RAI) > Stewart Bryant (Routing) > Sean Turner (Security) > Martin Stiemerling (Transport) >=20 > Please be resourceful in identifying possible candidates for these > positions, as developing our talent is a very crucial requirement for > the IETF. Also, please give serious consideration to accepting = nominations > you receive. =20 >=20 > The summaries of the desired expertise for the positions, developed by = the=20 > respective bodies, are found at: >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2013/expertise/ >=20 > In addition to nominations, the Nomcom seeks community input on=20 > the positions themselves. We need and welcome the community's=20 > views and input on the jobs within each organization. If you=20 > have ideas on the positions' responsibilities (more, less,=20 > different), please let us know. You can send us email about this to > nomcom13 at ietf.org, and we will use this feedback actively. >=20 > Thank you for your help in nominating a great pool of strong and = interesting > nominees! >=20 >=20 >=20 From brian@innovationslab.net Mon Oct 7 08:28:48 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3592521E80AF for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:28:48 -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 50TexppsFG80 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:28:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 257C921E8099 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2BD5880D2 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 10252124.rudm1.ra.johnshopkins.edu (addr16212925014.ippl.jhmi.edu [162.129.250.14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A298C130003 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5252D322.1000807@innovationslab.net> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:28:34 -0400 From: Brian Haberman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dmm@ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Em2iRwe3CkAFdo22IAKNgSrqQGgkwmKwN" Subject: [DMM] New co-chair X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 15:28:48 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Em2iRwe3CkAFdo22IAKNgSrqQGgkwmKwN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All, I have added Dapeng Liu as the third co-chair for the DMM WG. I am looking forward to have him assist Jouni and Julien with shepherding the work of the WG. Regards, Brian --Em2iRwe3CkAFdo22IAKNgSrqQGgkwmKwN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.20 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSUtMoAAoJEBOZRqCi7goqRS0IAMcxS/UJj9sdriRC/PJOURfh JBUsi8XbCpJTsk94/lBEAkWhNe6zks5KVz1H32FOnDIHyyWNd3iroeSUviieacJa IG4sj0Z6bzTGVsbDED+B+IOKMFWFoJ/rY9cYm5Ko3Ihlbp0msZxrL4rEjEAAWjQJ lRqKYn1kjMqogJ5DGhzIMPx4MSHmi/uTTDslMrq6T7UaiWmf+qwdHfFC97TehCB5 /0+pAjbXKkwS2sENDOPBz94DCyWrWP6sTJBizRvkhsEXx6tZbAxwS/1ck/m4x5pX 4lhB5UNkKdFcQ6QHUF1z0iLidn1asbgqxF6DTfvsZkg5mnXUvLMa1ccsr5NTpmg= =ki7R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Em2iRwe3CkAFdo22IAKNgSrqQGgkwmKwN-- From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Sat Oct 19 13:17:15 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85FD711E8283 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:17:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.654 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.654 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.055, 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 5RfnHPmqG+F8 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22c.google.com (mail-lb0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1B911E8281 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f172.google.com with SMTP id c11so3616580lbj.31 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:17:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xU1yKyqDYpMn9Z8U+0rpT2OEycWjlMaUyj2bXGwSLkw=; b=hQJmvqXoFwiKRJQsaUBkhdA6WisJZGsKJbCQDXgqtNhRyAtb6iO88qLqHXJXPIh8fb 1JRwgvaeBdhgVOm8nrk9BfU1fxWYSmYDd5Ydiwe+2yhOlUDXBR+Re6zYTxdZEWoA2add imBytMqbPHVKAkxzfOhus0XBG/gNq02HgAlCESuypBV/RJ9nPih/f9gNSAdBNaH4YEqb kdr8+M9nonM49M3bVMwONM+s6jU1Rd0PMExWbD3oog8wwZfvatF49nC69X3JIFCDwdfS 50OMSuZsH0aM6yC3JTlhJew6bpOEpVilo81fM1Vr+D3ULh8U2Om54tqAtQdlc7rEAbgU 0irw== X-Received: by 10.112.29.147 with SMTP id k19mr7161657lbh.9.1382213829775; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [188.117.15.108] ([188.117.15.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o1sm7820754lah.8.2013.10.19.13.17.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 19 Oct 2013 13:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Jouni Korhonen In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 23:17:05 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <78224A0F-B6B4-48AC-84B9-A10D0053C378@gmail.com> References: To: "dmm@ietf.org" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Subject: Re: [DMM] IETF88 in Vancouver X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 20:17:15 -0000 Just a reminder. - Jouni On Oct 3, 2013, at 9:38 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote: > Folks, > > We have requested for 2h WG slot for IETF88. Folks who > have WG items obviously need to prepare for a status > update (slide or few). If you want to present some > individual I-D or topic just lets the chairs know. The > usual prioritization for presentation slots is FIFO with > chartered topics having preference over non-chartered > topics. > > Jouni & Julien From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Oct 21 14:51:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A338F11E8295; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:51:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.569 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, 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 gsu2auExWf1l; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5EE811E86DC; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:51:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.80.p3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20131021215137.32508.53515.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:51:37 -0700 Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: [DMM] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02.txt X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:51:46 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Distributed Mobility Management Working G= roup of the IETF. Title : Distributed Mobility Management: Current practices and g= ap analysis Author(s) : Dapeng Liu Juan Carlos Zuniga Pierrick Seite H Anthony Chan Carlos J. Bernardos Filename : draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02.txt Pages : 26 Date : 2013-10-21 Abstract: The present document analyses deplyment practices of existing mobility protocols in a distributed mobility management environment. It also identifies some limitations compared to the expected functionality of a fully distributed mobility management system. The comparison is made taking into account the identified DMM requirements. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analys= is-02 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Thu Oct 24 00:55:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B835B11E816D for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:05 -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 qx1UFGKNLq4F for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x231.google.com (mail-la0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AF611E80F9 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id eh20so1542729lab.22 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xnMRVVNbyHGm1BjRU0KR0xJvDgc2m7sqTXZhE2qFPf4=; b=biak0/YKqqoHcJrCCCGuJImEehbHwYmYq75flBDFz8op14Vc1WxdQ4y4WtF7nuiXR8 gLo78mQMZP8AlC4ZfXKF2lV08nJ4IHmL2BlwOc+B3vsoUVZPeRdbJPBQCL3ft99d1RWl /ZRzQyhQyV6/sK5i49RTznXrR9K3+sy+wzcHHCEXqQOulbW1R4xgE1fgpgpdk08cJOVL aONWEq8JaRQwK3wbcwR598UYLk742xm23gUs6VKc3Cn133hb0ih9PRpy8j7dyWOtbi47 2c5LlYmA6LVDXjN/tk9kfvfFGqxqSg8mQ7igF5xc3KZe6ThoS8xJTKslvrLmr4WvaC5C ysXw== X-Received: by 10.112.53.130 with SMTP id b2mr1157259lbp.6.1382601302914; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.250.232] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id mr1sm1401050lbc.16.2013.10.24.00.55.00 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Jouni Korhonen X-Priority: 1 In-Reply-To: <20131021215137.32508.53515.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:54:59 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <72A59607-C034-4972-81E2-2FC6DD74B64B@gmail.com> References: <20131021215137.32508.53515.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "dmm@ietf.org" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Subject: Re: [DMM] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02.txt X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 07:55:06 -0000 Folks, Please review the latest revision of the gap analysis and pay close attention to the conclusions (Section 5.8.) the I-D draws. I'd like to remind you that this I-D is the justification for the possible further work and rechartering. This implies, the conclusions on gaps and identified new work needed must be then found from this I-D. The discussion has to start already before the meeting. - Jouni (on behalf of the chairs) On Oct 22, 2013, at 12:51 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. > This draft is a work item of the Distributed Mobility Management = Working Group of the IETF. >=20 > Title : Distributed Mobility Management: Current = practices and gap analysis > Author(s) : Dapeng Liu > Juan Carlos Zuniga > Pierrick Seite > H Anthony Chan > Carlos J. Bernardos > Filename : = draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02.txt > Pages : 26 > Date : 2013-10-21 >=20 > Abstract: > The present document analyses deplyment practices of existing > mobility protocols in a distributed mobility management environment. > It also identifies some limitations compared to the expected > functionality of a fully distributed mobility management system. = The > comparison is made taking into account the identified DMM > requirements. >=20 From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Thu Oct 24 01:12:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E925911E816D for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:12:16 -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 NioqYKqr7m-n for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:12:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22c.google.com (mail-la0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC21711E815A for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:12:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f44.google.com with SMTP id ep20so1602500lab.3 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:12:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date :to:mime-version; bh=LC0HpUxqBAYv/tLogJPBrv3/x4ehHSNgbWZr4dBFT9c=; b=vjzsWQ53iyMT0gXd6WBhwTSGOLb+FGdNFAHe6DXpPb2PalbrFpfrHLgRh8em8XXM7n zVKpuJzXakFNJcct6kiM+oOfB7WEtC/MmkOz/IOZ8u8pkmV+pQ9jq/7vBIY/DAO4376b tXX5eHpwhQdsw8uo1SoMVncfMFCxHm0o0nObgyEfz9IOjN3uy7QCQVxRjfdG9CLYpyaB nl7qS1Nq1qTzPWHdghO8U8tIt6kEI022CeKtqgagSaJXonZBEE8QXDnp21vdPronQ5Ns ewpxUabhGGmn+3xcn1xK/u3rFijXjHaCiIxEdb3jukNsjU2EjtlCLX6X/EqPXc0TedYb mJXQ== X-Received: by 10.112.14.3 with SMTP id l3mr1128955lbc.27.1382602332530; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:12:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.250.232] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id vk8sm1489258lbb.0.2013.10.24.01.12.12 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:12:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Jouni Korhonen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:12:11 +0300 To: "dmm@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Subject: [DMM] draft agenda uploaded X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:12:17 -0000 Folks, The draft agenda (subject to changes) has now been uploaded: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/agenda/agenda-88-dmm - Jouni From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Thu Oct 24 01:28:22 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF5121E8090 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:28:22 -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 8qcOMg6k1e7f for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22e.google.com (mail-lb0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9A0F21E808E for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id q8so1396312lbi.5 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:28:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:references :to:message-id:mime-version; bh=3joK+/zSYIYYUHJTJBpByeTNhoNt/9wtfEs6D3LECJU=; b=yzTmZCqFWxOT/iWkjQCs386CxV/ZxXqatjCl3eKojbuoRMkJvgQqXojzAKEbv8v8mI Z/kmk6y7P8VUN2M3tdHcUIcpxiq4H2y0+8yzX/z8HcXlYy//zhC2BTqGfOwP2eruRr3m hze1Yl7KsaXKKbaoGKZImVoS/C5PdqP0OvNFB1zU/YaF+Lywd+m8DxejwFWakcAz7WAx 7WpVOrmxCLl38bXV4LaKc9X+b9EY8dnX7ebxtXvh4uYi+UTgfYEuJXw1axYP2KIS/EUu MBz7iPIFAvKkWdkVGI/II+f1ZElAj62VIIiRQRBGd3WtuMLOBsBvQaCRl1FFnXk+R0UX x+FQ== X-Received: by 10.112.53.198 with SMTP id d6mr729114lbp.47.1382603300666; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.250.232] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id pw4sm1508120lbb.9.2013.10.24.01.28.18 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 01:28:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Jouni Korhonen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:28:17 +0300 References: <20130928150306.9951.52677.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "dmm@ietf.org" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Subject: [DMM] Advancing the draft-ietf-dmm-requirements-09.txt X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:28:23 -0000 Folks, The WGLC has ended a long ago for this draft and the comments have been incorporated for the most part. We are still waiting for few ACKs (nudge nudge) whether the latest revision addresses all comments received. After that the I-D will go into a bunch of directorate reviews (ops, sec, gen) and once the comments from those are sorted out , the proto write-up follows. So we are almost there but not quite ;-) - Jouni > Title : Requirements for Distributed Mobility Management > Author(s) : H Anthony Chan > Dapeng Liu > Pierrick Seite > Hidetoshi Yokota > Jouni Korhonen > Filename : draft-ietf-dmm-requirements-09.txt > Pages : 20 > Date : 2013-09-28 > > Abstract: > This document defines the requirements for Distributed Mobility > Management (DMM). The hierarchical structure in traditional wireless > networks has led primarily to centralized deployment models. As some > wireless networks are evolving away from the hierarchical structure, > such as in moving the content delivery servers closer to the users, a > distributed model for mobility management can be useful to them. From denghui02@gmail.com Thu Oct 24 03:25:42 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CF711E8110 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:25:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.812 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.812 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.097, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, 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 K7ZjSzSlOMOI for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:25:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x236.google.com (mail-vc0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1263B11E8173 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:25:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id im17so1365070vcb.13 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:25:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=EFzynO9U1TPyh4N9tqlzTJgzB5x37sOBi50HmsoKRVY=; b=T/gk/8aK5pmy1tEZtLa9Hsr2ULBfBcoiFzytc5T1xZH92cq9EJOKvIc6YmO5WYOkV2 VNiF0HEV0+JnOA5h3fI9M2j1gY07rwyqNBmE9eJkdV1G47Cm0YG7UifGLoqxEVaAd0GN rR5n25Tih81ljWR6G2t1hrZWVKfqi6HdiatCUNbPykAQ8Qwzap3aZpTXrUihgAsrgXag CYXAmewgvk/JB7nCSHlyzAf2NnjxWSApaWHuPIpR+TNh9SQuJ3R/6G9Kiyh1MuxK2EdP gfPKRVlA+oGQd5kAP+3Fp1HpdZUkIB+e+CM02mD5agN4JY0NC2TJyV7DmoVHU5keX2EG Rtzw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.169.203 with SMTP id a11mr1060883vcz.26.1382610341397; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:25:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.224.132 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:25:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:25:41 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: Jouni Korhonen Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6721c4430c6c04e97a0e93 Cc: "dmm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [DMM] draft agenda uploaded X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:25:42 -0000 --047d7b6721c4430c6c04e97a0e93 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello chairs, We have multiple drafts about SDN mobility, shall we consider to discuss them in general during this meeting, anyway I list one of them here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-sdn-mobility-00 Thanks a lot for your consideration DENG Hui 2013/10/24 Jouni Korhonen > Folks, > > The draft agenda (subject to changes) has now been uploaded: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/agenda/agenda-88-dmm > > - Jouni > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > dmm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm > --047d7b6721c4430c6c04e97a0e93 Content-Type: text/html; charset=GB2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello chairs,
 
We have mult= iple drafts about SDN mobility, shall we consider to discuss them in genera= l during this meeting, anyway I list one of them here:
 = ;
= Thanks a lot for your consideration
 
DENG Hui


2013/10= /24 Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Folks,

The draft agenda (subject to changes) has now been uploaded:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/agenda/agenda-88-dmm

- Jouni
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org
htt= ps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

--047d7b6721c4430c6c04e97a0e93-- From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Sat Oct 26 05:31:11 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1610911E824B for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 05:31:11 -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 JZJpeNVAy6Ue for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 05:31:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2EA011E826D for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 05:31:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id hp15so3897741lab.18 for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 05:31:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=oXMX7tnj05quYMkTYmdLmj28VVmaxzcaUeOyctzhtmM=; b=imfW2BGijEsnO6oYXhG1VGtuPxhITG5H4aHqi5bFnK2Sg3tpPGCGqTkcWDNkDAlESB elllHKTQW3zWiwW5U68rCXkD26leLuPG4IZtE36kKJ5g4b77HGbGUDH7vLsVKnUG0PCA daFSEFv7DuZxR3xxx5Qv0nlyZYpe5S1P61VmFApwxJ/HCeFYDiYSeH9oW9BJiYUYPmAg Pf502KRF7yU1/mxRBFMS8X3Lb7HGMxZygWBPnjZvbrsPcYtxnOSCj/jhYFUnYEQLFCla EkQU4RHk+tweWdGG1hA8N7pA4Qd+bgOxQZDLipCN1UzcqHfQKzPgG8hVXDiRfyIlm42y 8RyQ== X-Received: by 10.112.219.2 with SMTP id pk2mr5328444lbc.2.1382790667859; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 05:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [188.117.15.108] ([188.117.15.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u18sm5876729lbp.4.2013.10.26.05.31.07 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 26 Oct 2013 05:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Jouni Korhonen In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 15:31:06 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4E32BAD9-0EA8-4364-9C5C-7B4AE383181C@gmail.com> References: To: Hui Deng X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Cc: "dmm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [DMM] draft agenda uploaded X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 12:31:11 -0000 Hi, We could look into this topic after/during the rechartering discussion if time allows. I have not given any late requests a dedicated slot anymore but I'll still reflect all those in the agenda (and hopefully also upload the material if I receive those). - Jouni On Oct 24, 2013, at 1:25 PM, Hui Deng wrote: > Hello chairs, > =20 > We have multiple drafts about SDN mobility, shall we consider to = discuss them in general during this meeting, anyway I list one of them = here: > =20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-sdn-mobility-00 > Thanks a lot for your consideration > =20 > DENG Hui >=20 >=20 > 2013/10/24 Jouni Korhonen > Folks, >=20 > The draft agenda (subject to changes) has now been uploaded: > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/agenda/agenda-88-dmm >=20 > - Jouni > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > dmm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >=20 From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Sat Oct 26 11:43:32 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C025611E81AF for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:43:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.075 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.075 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.524, 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 EUR54O5SaA5o for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:43:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com (mail-lb0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2901621F9F51 for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id u14so1702024lbd.36 for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:43:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id :to:mime-version; bh=kj8sBmemdoB88oF+NxHHMM6VMj/4p4DGvt4oZfjwxX0=; b=M2u9CaOD0P949BCZ0DCs1rKWM87+bxE31qS7UCcMupSUMvuzeR1aqlLEDpsHPKqQCJ pD/CIwPjxYgJfvRS7VEPt9qD5eywlmjDy332fWgHBjWlfXC2QJAm/kg1445oa0Haw8e4 0oAaBqqvrmVa7W9TnXU8lvpOtkfuowcP+SgPIWSaynWINHHCjvf/cK6a/VuFhzzWzBqZ PGSbarGYkKS0Tj6Ua2pRLuFH4V6KcM4y2d6Tz+bFgc7/h29qcbBz6geL5Ed+E+oueWWK ZBpmVL8U3SsaF387Rw7GePJOorgvt05cXghlVkKNhzv/rP+c16XAYbmbvlEcbzhCqfwu 4OGw== X-Received: by 10.112.168.170 with SMTP id zx10mr5951223lbb.0.1382813009022; Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [188.117.15.107] ([188.117.15.107]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f4sm1891593lah.0.2013.10.26.11.43.28 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 26 Oct 2013 11:43:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Jouni Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 21:43:27 +0300 Message-Id: To: dmm@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Subject: [DMM] review on draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02 X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 18:43:32 -0000 Folks, I did some brief reading on the -02 version (mainly to trigger even some discussion!). Here are my initial comments. I am quite pleased with the sections up to 5. Good stuff. In Section 5.2.=20 whether the allocated IP addresses are anchored). However, there are ongoing IETF works that are proposing that the network could indicate the different IP addresses properties during assignment procedures [I-D.bhandari-dhc-class-based-prefix], [I-D.korhonen-6man-prefix-properties]. * Here I would also reference to latest MPVD activities in Mif, since in = my mind PVDs could.. could'ish.. also be used to carry properties & = information about prefixes. * Anyway, I would like to stress in this section that even if we have = individual attempts to fix the gap, there is no solution in IETF.. not even close = that=20 would be accepted & endorsed by IETF. Section 5.8. "o Existing solutions do only provide an optimal initial anchor assignment, a gap being the lack of dynamic anchor change/new anchor assignment. Neither the HA switch nor the LMA runtime assignment allow changing the anchor during an ongoing session." * In theory MOBIKE could be used to switch from a gateway to another =20 mid-session.. from the MN point of view. There is no protocol for the network side (there _was_ an attempt to do a gw-to-gw thing years = ago). Agree that there is nothing for (P)MIPv6. "o Currently, there is no efficient mechanism specified by the IETF that allows to dynamically discover the presence of nodes that can play the role of anchor, discover their capabilities and allow the selection of the most suitable one." * Hmm, DHAAD? H-flag in RA? The MAP option in RAs? We do have multiple mechanisms it seems. In some cases we can even distinguish between a "local" vs. "normal" anchor. Using DHAAD one could use anycast to locate topologically close HAs. * For RFC5685 allows us to do IKEv2 to anycast address. That combined to RFC5026 would allow discover topologically close HA. Same for with RFC4555 to enhance MOBIKE gateway selection. Routing infra would be used to select the "most suitable" from locality point of view. * What is meant by the "capability" of an anchor? Local vs. non-local? I do agree we only can distinguish between on-link HA vs. MAP vs. something beyond on-link. And that is not much. I would say the above existing mechanisms need to be reflected in the=20 document. "o The mobile node needs to simultaneously use multiple IP addresses, which requires additional support which might not be available on the mobile node's stack, especially for the case of network-based solutions." * This gap means what? Is the additional support what REQ2 is about? Like giving a meaning to prefixes which are anchored and which not? "o While existing network-based DMM practices may allow to deploy multiple LMAs and dynamically select the best one, this requires to still keep some centralization in the control plane, to access on the policy store (as defined in RFC5213)." * Ok.. so you are saying a subscriber database or AAA server, which is central makes a mobility protocol centralized? Since I got the feeling folks want to work more on the control and data plane separation, the summary should state the lack of solutions in that space more clearly (ok.. there is now stuff coming from Netext for PMIP but still). And about the table. An 'X' means a gap? It is not really said anywhere how to interpret the table. By the way, I would add a disclaimer that this document does not = consider transport layer solutions like mptcp since they are not mobility = protocols per se. I think we need this disclaimer, since e.g. mptcp is now = deployed to allow mobility with specific services. - Jouni From Marco.Liebsch@neclab.eu Sun Oct 27 14:02:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC9E11E82BD for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:02:28 -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 IwGOwMcbUxFl for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:02:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3BE11E82BB for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:02:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7C0105E0B for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:56:56 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xxztnwh29oNd for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:56:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from METHONE.office.hd (methone.office.hd [192.168.24.54]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1675FFCC0 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:56:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from DAPHNIS.office.hd ([169.254.2.16]) by METHONE.office.hd ([192.168.24.54]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 22:01:57 +0100 From: Marco Liebsch To: "dmm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: DMM framework Thread-Index: Ac7TVrzOCDHkmqfmRFa7YSUJAA32Cw== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:01:56 +0000 Message-ID: <69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D553ACE36@DAPHNIS.office.hd> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.7.0.213] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [DMM] DMM framework X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:02:28 -0000 Folks, during my presentation at last IETF about http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-lieb= sch-dmm-framework-analysis-02.txt,=20 around 20 people indicated interest in working on a framework. We think this framework, the described functional entities and associated r= eference points to enable unicast DMM is mature. The original idea of this framework was to be= mobility protocol-agnostic and identify components of available transport network technology, includin= g SDN technology, to complement mobility protocols and enable optimized DMM operation. Such opti= mization we see in terms of transport costs, routing path, latency, etc. We'd appreciate any comments and contributions to the framework. Please als= o refer to the slides from last meeting to recall the status of the work. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-dmm-11.pdf marco From jouni.nospam@gmail.com Wed Oct 30 23:59:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F089511E80EC for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:59:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.391 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.391 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.208, 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 zD6dVB4goLEB for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 959E611E820C for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id ea20so1949631lab.10 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:59:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id :cc:to:mime-version; bh=pDBErFE8Finsqyb1Y2VxqR+dHsCR3qpb/gIy1/ykeho=; b=VVDVpF5pUn9kNk0ChvO3M900htEOOCvyNPsAyILoZdjw/U/l48XqwiUXiWed03+zs5 WZsBqM62IgxPzypiyM88CdtpgrDArBENOly6kBPkGOIQUdvo+LMzIFwLwBfVz29lzw1B 9O/9dtLhJLGGoR/97VvHu0aUTARY5/ZnKsI5Mn3gB/OKzH9wiNOzlJdrOKe7/1p4BIal 7YMt5bgDAMZjJiTtJdMk0FVqKWsWYlDDAIGKKO9r7FSn6t6iPJnObzZhRuIv6Vd5v9V0 5qV+KycQODkZin2x/lZhlmgWkzJ/Lf1kEe0pVmA7Tja509Sax65LxCQKkRGPW/9gAOzq Uz3Q== X-Received: by 10.152.115.177 with SMTP id jp17mr221955lab.59.1383202767889; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.250.208] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id sc4sm1805828lab.10.2013.10.30.23.59.26 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:59:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Jouni Korhonen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:59:25 +0200 Message-Id: <08868D8B-9DB9-4685-8521-62F6FFF1129C@gmail.com> To: "dmm@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Cc: Dapeng Liu Subject: [DMM] gap analysis issues X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 06:59:36 -0000 Folks, For some reason the Issue Tracker tickets #41-45 did not seem to make it = into the mailing list. At least I cannot see them in the archives: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmm/trac/ticket/41 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmm/trac/ticket/42 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmm/trac/ticket/43 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmm/trac/ticket/44 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmm/trac/ticket/45=20 - Jouni= From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Thu Oct 31 08:59:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB64511E8232 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:59:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, 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 uSLRx4I4UbEM for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail13.telekom.de (tcmail13.telekom.de [80.149.113.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5114611E825A for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he111628.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.20]) by tcmail11.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 31 Oct 2013 16:58:54 +0100 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.124]) by HE111628.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:58:54 +0100 From: To: , Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:58:53 +0100 Thread-Topic: DMM framework Thread-Index: Ac7TVrzOCDHkmqfmRFa7YSUJAA32CwC9c6Vw Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C759E30B3@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D553ACE36@DAPHNIS.office.hd> In-Reply-To: <69756203DDDDE64E987BC4F70B71A26D553ACE36@DAPHNIS.office.hd> Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: en-US 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: [DMM] DMM framework X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 15:59:41 -0000 Dear Marco, all, I think the idea of describing mobility management functions in a generic a= nd modular way can help to allow for fair comparison of different existing = approaches and new extensions towards fulfillment of DMM requirements. As y= our draft shows also routing-protocol based approaches as LISP can be descr= ibed by this nomenclature. With the new functional entities - and the defi= ned reference points in between - and the abstraction of the mobility relat= ed ones it thus should help to analyse general network architectures and fu= nctional decompositions for both fixed and mobile sessions - in a similar f= ashion as SDN/NFV (Software Defined Networks/Network Function Virtualizatio= n) concepts proceed. As usually the network analysis will focus on the performance parameters de= noted below. I think therefore the framework activities are valuable work = from an operators point of view which we should intensify - thus perhaps he= lping the resulting protocol proposals to be deployed in reality one day. Perhaps one could add in sect. 4.1/4.2 that within MN in Fig. 2 and Fig.3 t= he corresponding FEs FE_MU_U and FE_MU_C are not included since for PMIP6 t= hey reside in MAG ... this surely will become clear from the appendices A1/= A2 later on.=20 If I remember correctly it was agreed that both framework documents (i.e. c= ompared to http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-chan-dmm-framework-03.txt) with t= heir different way of abstraction can complement each other and should cont= inue, right? Thanks! Best regards Dirk -----Original Message----- From: dmm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dmm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco= Liebsch Sent: Sonntag, 27. Oktober 2013 22:02 To: dmm@ietf.org Subject: [DMM] DMM framework Folks, during my presentation at last IETF about http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-lieb= sch-dmm-framework-analysis-02.txt,=20 around 20 people indicated interest in working on a framework. We think this framework, the described functional entities and associated r= eference points to enable unicast DMM is mature. The original idea of this framework was to be= mobility protocol-agnostic and identify components of available transport network technology, includin= g SDN technology, to complement mobility protocols and enable optimized DMM operation. Such opti= mization we see in terms of transport costs, routing path, latency, etc. We'd appreciate any comments and contributions to the framework. Please als= o refer to the slides from last meeting to recall the status of the work. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-dmm-11.pdf marco _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm From cjbc@it.uc3m.es Thu Oct 31 09:21:04 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C57021E8119 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 09:21:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.256 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.256 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 oYdMlvqS2TKG for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 09:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D0A21E8108 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 09:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1738948AE; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 17:20:50 +0100 (CET) X-uc3m-safe: yes X-uc3m-safe: yes Received: from [163.117.139.72] (acorde.it.uc3m.es [163.117.139.72]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: cjbc@smtp02.uc3m.es) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE03C7687B0; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 17:20:50 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <1383236450.4225.35.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano To: Jouni Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 17:20:50 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5-2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1224-7.0.0.1014-20258.005 X-TM-AS-Result: No--39.349-7.0-31-1 X-imss-scan-details: No--39.349-7.0-31-1 Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [DMM] review on draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-02 X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:21:04 -0000 Hi Jouni, Thanks for your review and comments. Please see some comments from us inline below. On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 21:43 +0300, Jouni wrote: > Folks, > > I did some brief reading on the -02 version (mainly to trigger even > some discussion!). Here are my initial comments. > > I am quite pleased with the sections up to 5. Good stuff. > > In Section 5.2. > > whether the allocated IP addresses are anchored). However, there are > ongoing IETF works that are proposing that the network could indicate > the different IP addresses properties during assignment procedures > [I-D.bhandari-dhc-class-based-prefix], > [I-D.korhonen-6man-prefix-properties]. > > * Here I would also reference to latest MPVD activities in Mif, since in my > mind PVDs could.. could'ish.. also be used to carry properties & information > about prefixes. OK. We'll address this in the next revision. > > * Anyway, I would like to stress in this section that even if we have individual > attempts to fix the gap, there is no solution in IETF.. not even close that > would be accepted & endorsed by IETF. OK. We'll add that in the next revision. > > Section 5.8. > > "o Existing solutions do only provide an optimal initial anchor > assignment, a gap being the lack of dynamic anchor change/new > anchor assignment. Neither the HA switch nor the LMA runtime > assignment allow changing the anchor during an ongoing session." > > * In theory MOBIKE could be used to switch from a gateway to another > mid-session.. from the MN point of view. There is no protocol for the > network side (there _was_ an attempt to do a gw-to-gw thing years ago). > Agree that there is nothing for (P)MIPv6. OK, we'll add a note mentioning that MOBIKE is capable of doing that. > > "o Currently, there is no efficient mechanism specified by the IETF > that allows to dynamically discover the presence of nodes that can > play the role of anchor, discover their capabilities and allow the > selection of the most suitable one." > > * Hmm, DHAAD? H-flag in RA? The MAP option in RAs? We do have multiple > mechanisms it seems. In some cases we can even distinguish between a > "local" vs. "normal" anchor. Using DHAAD one could use anycast to > locate topologically close HAs. Agree. We'll add some text on the next revision. > > * For RFC5685 allows us to do IKEv2 to anycast address. That combined to > RFC5026 would allow discover topologically close HA. Same for with > RFC4555 to enhance MOBIKE gateway selection. Routing infra would be > used to select the "most suitable" from locality point of view. > > * What is meant by the "capability" of an anchor? Local vs. non-local? > I do agree we only can distinguish between on-link HA vs. MAP vs. > something beyond on-link. And that is not much. > See above. > I would say the above existing mechanisms need to be reflected in the > document. Agree. We'll try to explain the need for enhanced mechanisms in the next revision of the draft. > > "o The mobile node needs to simultaneously use multiple IP addresses, > which requires additional support which might not be available on > the mobile node's stack, especially for the case of network-based > solutions." > > * This gap means what? Is the additional support what REQ2 is about? > Like giving a meaning to prefixes which are anchored and which not? Yes, this gap refers to 5.2. > > "o While existing network-based DMM practices may allow to deploy > multiple LMAs and dynamically select the best one, this requires > to still keep some centralization in the control plane, to access > on the policy store (as defined in RFC5213)." > > * Ok.. so you are saying a subscriber database or AAA server, which is > central makes a mobility protocol centralized? No, we just meant that a part of the control plane will remain centralized. Thinking about control and data plane separation, we could have a distributed data plane and a centralized (or partially) centralized data plane. Meaning that we do not have a 100% distributed solution. > > Since I got the feeling folks want to work more on the control and data > plane separation, the summary should state the lack of solutions in > that space more clearly (ok.. there is now stuff coming from Netext > for PMIP but still). OK, we'll do it in the next revision. > > And about the table. An 'X' means a gap? It is not really said anywhere > how to interpret the table. Yes, X means "there is a gap"; we will clarify this in the update. > > By the way, I would add a disclaimer that this document does not consider > transport layer solutions like mptcp since they are not mobility protocols > per se. I think we need this disclaimer, since e.g. mptcp is now deployed > to allow mobility with specific services. It does make sense but, if we add such disclaimer, we should also add a disclaimer for SIP and any kind of application layer solutions.... Introduction highlights that the focus of the document is on IP mobility protocols, and therefore excludes all others solutions. Isn't sufficient? Thanks! > > - Jouni > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > dmm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm