Subject: [DMM] draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-05

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 11:07:31 -0500

Hi all,

I quickly looked at this draft.
It seems like the authors or Danny changed "sustained IP address" to
"session lasting IP address". It sounds a bit better.
However, my concerns about sustained IP address remain the same on the
session lasting IP address because semantically they mean the same
thing, the session lasting is just a more flashy name.

I really don't understand how in the world this draft became a WG
draft in the first place. Given that, my suggestion is to finish up
this work by changing it to Informational. I don't believe it is
implementable.

This draft is also not the type of draft dmm should be working on, dmm
I think is a continuation of MIP related mobility WGs and this draft
has nothing to do with this.

Make it Informational, folks.

Behcet

---

From: Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 13:03:09 -0700

Lo and behold your cry for intended status change will happen!

Actually, this came up earlier because 1) the I-D makes a normative 
referecence to an informational RFC5014 and 2) API documents are 
informational in general. It just did not make to the latest revision..

- JOuni

6/29/2016, 9:07 AM, Behcet Sarikaya kirjoitti:
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:12:21 -0500

> Lo and behold your cry for intended status change will happen!

Lo I just now checked it.
I could not see any API development in dmm charter.

Aren't you responsible for this?

Regards,

Behcet

---

From: Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:04:19 -0700

o Exposing mobility state to mobile nodes and network nodes:
       define solutions that allow, for example, mobile nodes to select
       either a care-of address or a home address depending on an
       application' mobility needs. In order to enable this

To me it is there..

       functionality, the network-side control functions and other
       networking nodes must also be able to exchange appropriate
       control information, as well as to the mobile nodes and their
       applications.

And again here.

If apps or mobile node need to be able to select appropriate address I 
find it ok to describe it.. call it api or not in the charter.

- Jouni

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:25:52 -0500

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]> wrote:
> If apps or mobile node need to be able to select appropriate address I find
> it ok to describe it.. call it api or not in the charter.
>
> - Jouni
>

Not to me.

I don't see any API. The API RFC 5014 was done in 6man. mif WG used to
do API. mif WG had clear items on API in its charter.

Regards,

Behcet