From tme@multicasttech.com Sat Apr 18 07:12:33 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B73A3A6C66 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:12:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.965 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.965 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.366, 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 d+bWKYz-MwrR for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.americafree.tv (rossini.americafree.tv [63.105.122.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069C63A6A67 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (rossini.americafree.tv [63.105.122.34]) by mail.americafree.tv (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F0CB39D4C76 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:13:46 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <6820DE13-2F20-4692-9229-FDCAD99A552C@multicasttech.com> From: Marshall Eubanks To: multimob@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:13:44 -0400 References: <20090414200002.249023A6DF3@core3.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Subject: [multimob] Fwd: WG Review: Network-Based Mobility Extensions (netext) X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 14:12:33 -0000 Seems relevant Begin forwarded message: > From: IESG Secretary > Date: April 14, 2009 4:00:02 PM EDT > To: ietf-announce@ietf.org > Cc: netext@mail.mobileip.jp > Subject: WG Review: Network-Based Mobility Extensions (netext) > Reply-To: iesg@ietf.org > > A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Internet Area. > The IESG > has not made any determination as yet. The following draft charter > was > submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please > send > your comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by Tuesday, > April > 21, 2009. > > Network-Based Mobility Extensions (netext) > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Last Modified: 2009-04-03 > > Current Status: Proposed Working Group > > Chair(s): > TBD > > Internet Area Director(s): > Ralph Droms > Jari Arkko > > Internet Area Advisor: > TBD > > Mailing Lists: > http://www.mobileip.jp/mailman/listinfo/netext > > Description of Working Group: > > Proxy Mobile IPv6, specified in RFC 5213, is a network-based mobility > protocol. It uses a Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) and a Local Mobility > Anchor (LMA) to allow hosts to move around within a domain while > keeping > their address or address prefix stable. Proxy Mobile IPv6 has been > incorporated into a number of products and deployments are starting. > Certain deployment considerations, including localized routing and > bulk > refresh of lifetime are already emerging. > > The working group will focus on the following topics relevant for > network-based mobility: > > Localized Routing: a specification for routing traffic between the > MAG(s) without involving the LMA. That is, allow the MAGs to route > traffic between hosts from one MAG to another, without being tunneled > all the way to the LMA. This reduces latency and backhaul load. > Applications such as voice can benefit from the reduced latency. Hosts > are not affected, as they still send and receive their packets via the > MAG. > > Bulk Refresh: a specification of improving the signaling load for > binding lifetime refresh. The current specifications call for the > handling of each mobility session independent of each other. When a > large number of hosts are served by a single MAG, a periodic refresh > of > the binding lifetimes can lead to a signaling storm. The purpose of > the > Bulk Refresh feature is to construct a protocol feature that allows > such > refreshes to occur on a per-MAG basis. > > LMA Redirection: a specification for allowing an LMA to redirect a MAG > to another LMA. This is primarily needed as a way to perform load > balancing, and is complementary to the initial LMA discovery work in > the > NETLMM WG. > > The proposed activity will be complementary to the existing IETF > Working > Groups, notably the NETLMM and MEXT WGs. The NETEXT working group will > also act as the primary forum where new extensions on top of the Proxy > Mobile IPv6 protocol can be developed. The addition of such new > extensions to the working group involves addition of the extension to > this charter through the normal rechartering process. > > Milestones > > May 2009 WG chartered > July 2009 Initial WG draft on Bulk Refresh > September 2009 Initial WG draft on LMA Redirection > November 2009 Initial WG draft on Route Optimization > December 2009 Submit Bulk Refresh to IESG for publication as a > Proposed Standard RFC > January 2009 Submit LMA Redirection to IESG for publication as a > Proposed Standard RFC > April 2010 Submit Route Optimization to IESG for publication > as a Proposed Standard RFC > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > Regards Marshall Eubanks CEO / AmericaFree.TV From tme@multicasttech.com Sun Apr 26 10:51:36 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51273A6D59 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:51:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.95 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.95 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.351, 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 TWEX8rCb3566 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.americafree.tv (rossini.americafree.tv [63.105.122.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43B393A6EC9 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:51:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (rossini.americafree.tv [63.105.122.34]) by mail.americafree.tv (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E7F53AC864C for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:52:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: From: Marshall Eubanks To: multimob@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Priority: 3 Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:52:38 -0400 References: <244FB13EAF194A469E8A9B71923C2D65@your029b8cecfe> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Subject: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:51:36 -0000 FYI Begin forwarded message: > From: Adrian Farrel > Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT > To: routing-discussion@ietf.org > Subject: BOF Requests for IETF-75 > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel > > Hi, > > According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF: > >>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors to >>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT) > > If you plan to submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start > the preparation and let us know as soon as possible. > > RFC 5434 is good reading about how to prepare for a successful BOF > session. > > Adrian and Ross > _______________________________________________ > routing-discussion mailing list > routing-discussion@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion > Regards Marshall Eubanks CEO / AmericaFree.TV From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Mon Apr 27 01:13:53 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13C93A6853 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:13:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t1pAWRwh0pEW for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:13:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail33.telekom.de (tcmail33.telekom.de [194.25.30.7]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51AF13A67D2 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:13:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s4de8psaans.blf.telekom.de (HELO s4de8psaans.mitte.t-com.de) ([10.151.180.168]) by tcmail31.telekom.de with ESMTP; 27 Apr 2009 10:15:10 +0200 Received: from S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de ([10.151.229.14]) by s4de8psaans.mitte.t-com.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:15:10 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:15:10 +0200 Message-ID: <643B0A1D1A13AB498304E0BBC8027848E0427E@S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 thread-index: AcnGl9lwf3EFmthNSwyHD3XiZQE3WAAdqU7w References: <244FB13EAF194A469E8A9B71923C2D65@your029b8cecfe> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Apr 2009 08:15:10.0005 (UTC) FILETIME=[481D3E50:01C9C710] Subject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:13:54 -0000 Thanks, Marshall, For pointing at the time line and document. You are right, this is now = really urgent, especially with regard to RFC quote: The expectations for a second BOF are generally higher than those for an = initial BOF. In addition to the work done up through the first BOF, the = first BOF will have highlighted the key areas where additional work is = needed. The time leading up to the second BOF will need to be spent = working through those outstanding issues. Second BOFs should not be a repeat of the first BOF, with the same = issues being raised and the same (unsatisfactory) responses provided. = The second BOF needs to show that all previously identified issues have = been resolved and that formation of a WG is now in order. =20 ... we should now focus on charter update and documents as agreed in SF. Are we inline that the WG generally should cover all mobility-related = issues of Multicast,=20 i.e., extend multicast onto the mobility domain ... And the proposed = first documents will concentrate on Multicast reception only and PMIPv6? Best regards, Dirk -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:multimob-bounces@ietf.org] Im = Auftrag von Marshall Eubanks Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2009 19:53 An: multimob@ietf.org Betreff: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 FYI Begin forwarded message: > From: Adrian Farrel > Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT > To: routing-discussion@ietf.org > Subject: BOF Requests for IETF-75 > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel > > Hi, > > According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF: > >>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors to >>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT) > > If you plan to submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start =20 > the preparation and let us know as soon as possible. > > RFC 5434 is good reading about how to prepare for a successful BOF =20 > session. > > Adrian and Ross > _______________________________________________ > routing-discussion mailing list > routing-discussion@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion > Regards Marshall Eubanks CEO / AmericaFree.TV _______________________________________________ multimob mailing list multimob@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob From schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de Mon Apr 27 01:42:36 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52F33A6A98 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:42:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.701, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] 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 3qcnxUl1K9vA for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.rz.htw-berlin.de (mail2.rz.fhtw-berlin.de [141.45.10.102]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE513A63EB for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:42:34 -0700 (PDT) Envelope-to: multimob@ietf.org Received: from e178145206.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.178.145.206] helo=[192.168.178.20]) by mail2.rz.htw-berlin.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1LyMRO-000MCt-04; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:43:54 +0200 Message-ID: <49F57047.1030206@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:43:51 +0200 From: "Thomas C. Schmidt" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de References: <244FB13EAF194A469E8A9B71923C2D65@your029b8cecfe> <643B0A1D1A13AB498304E0BBC8027848E0427E@S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de> In-Reply-To: <643B0A1D1A13AB498304E0BBC8027848E0427E@S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: multimob@ietf.org Subject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:42:36 -0000 Hi Dirk, yes, it looks like tough work ;) Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de wrote: > Thanks, Marshall, > For pointing at the time line and document. You are right, this is now really urgent, especially with regard to RFC quote: > > The expectations for a second BOF are generally higher than those for an initial BOF. In addition to the work done up through the first BOF, the first BOF will have highlighted the key areas where additional work is needed. The time leading up to the second BOF will need to be spent working through those outstanding issues. > Second BOFs should not be a repeat of the first BOF, with the same issues being raised and the same (unsatisfactory) responses provided. The second BOF needs to show that all previously identified issues have been resolved and that formation of a WG is now in order. > ... we should now focus on charter update and documents as agreed in SF. > > Are we inline that the WG generally should cover all mobility-related issues of Multicast, > i.e., extend multicast onto the mobility domain ... I guess we should. > And the proposed first documents will concentrate on Multicast reception only and PMIPv6? Well, I guess the "and" should be weakened. Actually we should come up with a little more than only mcast listeners in PMIPv6. As discussed in SF, we (this is Hitoshi, Gorry & I) started reworking the MLD parts ... Let's see, but I suppose we agree: there should be some jump in progress! Cheers, Thomas > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:multimob-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Marshall Eubanks > Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2009 19:53 > An: multimob@ietf.org > Betreff: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 > > FYI > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Adrian Farrel >> Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT >> To: routing-discussion@ietf.org >> Subject: BOF Requests for IETF-75 >> Reply-To: Adrian Farrel >> >> Hi, >> >> According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF: >> >>>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors to >>>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT) >> If you plan to submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start >> the preparation and let us know as soon as possible. >> >> RFC 5434 is good reading about how to prepare for a successful BOF >> session. >> >> Adrian and Ross >> _______________________________________________ >> routing-discussion mailing list >> routing-discussion@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion >> > > Regards > Marshall Eubanks > CEO / AmericaFree.TV > > _______________________________________________ > multimob mailing list > multimob@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob > _______________________________________________ > multimob mailing list > multimob@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob -- Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt ° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Berliner Tor 7 ° ° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group 20099 Hamburg, Germany ° ° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 ° ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 ° From behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com Mon Apr 27 08:41:25 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37BEA3A69C4 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:41:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.479 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.277, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] 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 1xZU8MiET7RC for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:41:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n9.bullet.re3.yahoo.com (n9.bullet.re3.yahoo.com [68.142.237.94]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BF43C3A6801 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [68.142.237.88] by n9.bullet.re3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 15:42:42 -0000 Received: from [67.195.9.83] by t4.bullet.re3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 15:42:42 -0000 Received: from [67.195.9.106] by t3.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 15:42:41 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 15:41:05 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 485700.80422.bm@omp110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 22740 invoked by uid 60001); 27 Apr 2009 15:42:41 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1240846961; bh=u1kyeNnL1i1bgWLeYI1TX71VCIZXA4elUiKtiTxm9+c=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cNKY0J1guhEDZNUQrw++nidvwX2/Fl/HOsFh1qr0mmBJ4aCbJlbCJOLAFsvPWTTy2uAAaKvV1Scddz/3kBc/pZM6MoO1EYmP7M7HKYWvbJmxna5qNA2mcGNlDnezB5nQmLRE0gphARkVuvmVJjBCSrbWSAxb9cN3TMJcwzOwouM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HsDJEZ06bGSJlW/HBK3pqhpt8ByqPJm0sjSk42xskLS4oUqadConuPVp4t5q7nvFVIPfm2ejRHFwndYWumn8ZgyPpDfUq6L79hBo8dXJzZn7WF6pQKDEaRUPm0MJraC2XH2erruslx328IGFXdACvRp6Yys8V+s2QeCSKl5qY5E=; Message-ID: <770024.22184.qm@web111413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: WFC1PYkVM1nH34RyrQLxOlbUA.Z8OZYZy_mUNw3F1z.4VQlIwnwUDa3wrmYtrso0mDZQhqPVHFlqLI_4xd1nTPDDWtNgKIiYrUUSKmK7yg.qRenyqTShu.wWZPH8PdAl6mblKoAFRfl1gfQ7iWWfvfbZaV55LPCDmR0dcvJznftelPr5rDJq9d0lAQPMgxG_mUe.Fdlsr63G_c4CIu5G1tjRBGhveNpee._DFBRGRqGBF3g.S4kB_H4g_uJk71VvXh85E4zTWa0dvSBcQYnWpZqhNmA3JVjotzit6yoa8kf58i4zwM6kVztcZhxVcpQdV_1mp5Yx Received: from [206.16.17.212] by web111413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:42:41 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1277.35 YahooMailWebService/0.7.289.1 References: <244FB13EAF194A469E8A9B71923C2D65@your029b8cecfe> <643B0A1D1A13AB498304E0BBC8027848E0427E@S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de> <49F57047.1030206@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:42:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Behcet Sarikaya To: "Thomas C. Schmidt" , Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de In-Reply-To: <49F57047.1030206@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1479352792-1240846961=:22184" Cc: multimob@ietf.org Subject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:41:25 -0000 --0-1479352792-1240846961=:22184 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Thomas, all,=0A=A0 As we discussed in SF, the draft on=0AGroup Managemen= t Protocol Operation Over Wireless Problem Statement=0Acould be improved. G= ory said he plans to help starting sometime in May.=0A=A0 If you wish I can= give you the xml file.=0A=0ARegards,=0A=0ABehcet=0A=0A=0A=0A______________= __________________=0AFrom: Thomas C. Schmidt =0ATo: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de=0ACc: multimob@ietf.org=0ASent: Monday= , April 27, 2009 3:43:51 AM=0ASubject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for= IETF-75=0A=0AHi Dirk,=0A=0Ayes, it looks like tough work ;)=0A=0ADirk.von-= Hugo@telekom.de wrote:=0A> Thanks, Marshall,=0A> For pointing at the time l= ine and document. You are right, this is now really urgent, especially with= regard to RFC quote:=0A> =0A> The expectations for a second BOF are genera= lly higher than those for an initial BOF.=A0 In addition to the work done u= p through the first BOF, the first BOF will have highlighted the key areas = where additional work is needed.=A0 The time leading up to the second BOF w= ill need to be spent working through those outstanding issues.=0A> Second B= OFs should not be a repeat of the first BOF, with the same issues being rai= sed and the same (unsatisfactory) responses provided.=A0 The second BOF nee= ds to show that all previously identified issues have been resolved and tha= t formation of a WG is now in order.=A0=A0=A0 ... we should now focus on ch= arter update and documents as agreed in SF.=0A> =0A> Are we inline that the= WG generally should cover all mobility-related issues of Multicast, i.e., = extend multicast onto the mobility domain ... =0A=0AI guess we should.=0A= =0A> And the proposed first documents will concentrate on Multicast recepti= on =0Aonly and PMIPv6?=0A=0AWell, I guess the "and" should be weakened. Act= ually we should come up with a little more than only mcast listeners in PMI= Pv6. As discussed in SF, we (this is Hitoshi, Gorry & I) started reworking = the MLD parts ...=0A=0ALet's see, but I suppose we agree: there should be s= ome jump in progress!=0A=0ACheers,=0A=0AThomas=0A=0A=0A> -----Urspr=FCnglic= he Nachricht-----=0A> Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:multimob-bounc= es@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Marshall Eubanks=0A> Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. Apr= il 2009 19:53=0A> An: multimob@ietf.org=0A> Betreff: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Re= quests for IETF-75=0A> =0A> FYI=0A> =0A> Begin forwarded message:=0A> =0A>>= From: Adrian Farrel =0A>> Date: April 26, 2009 1= 2:47:20 PM EDT=0A>> To: routing-discussion@ietf.org=0A>> Subject: BOF Reque= sts for IETF-75=0A>> Reply-To: Adrian Farrel =0A>= > =0A>> Hi,=0A>> =0A>> According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IET= F:=0A>> =0A>>>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors= to=0A>>>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT)=0A>> If you plan to s= ubmit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start=A0 the preparation and = let us know as soon as possible.=0A>> =0A>> RFC 5434 is good reading about = how to prepare for a successful BOF=A0 session.=0A>> =0A>> Adrian and Ross= =0A>> _______________________________________________=0A>> routing-discussi= on mailing list=0A>> routing-discussion@ietf.org=0A>> https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion=0A>> =0A> =0A> Regards=0A> Marshall Eub= anks=0A> CEO / AmericaFree.TV=0A> =0A> ____________________________________= ___________=0A> multimob mailing list=0A> multimob@ietf.org=0A> https://www= ..ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob=0A> ___________________________________= ____________=0A> multimob mailing list=0A> multimob@ietf.org=0A> https://ww= w.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob=0A=0A-- =0AProf. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt= =0A=B0 Hamburg University of Applied Sciences=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 Berliner Tor 7 =B0=0A=B0 Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Gr= oup=A0 =A0 20099 Hamburg, Germany =B0=0A=B0 http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 =B0=0A=B0 http:/= /www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt=A0 =A0 Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 =B0= =0A_______________________________________________=0Amultimob mailing list= =0Amultimob@ietf.org=0Ahttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob=0A=0A= =0A=0A --0-1479352792-1240846961=:22184 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Thomas, all,
=0A
  As we discussed in= SF, the draft on
=0A
Group Management Protocol Operation Over Wir= eless Problem Statement
could be improved. Gory said he plans to help st= arting sometime in May.
=0A
  If you wish I can give you the = xml file.
=0A
 
=0A
Regards,
=0A
 =0A
Behcet
=0A

=0A
=0A=0AFrom: Thomas = C. Schmidt <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
To: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de
Cc: multimob@ietf.org
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 3:43:51 AMSubject: Re: [multimob] F= wd: BOF Requests for IETF-75

Hi Dirk,

yes, it looks li= ke tough work ;)

Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de wrote:> Thanks, Marshall,
> For pointing at the time line and document.= You are right, this is now really urgent, especially with regard to RFC qu= ote:
>
> The expectations for a second BOF are generally highe= r than those for an initial BOF.  In addition to the work done up thro= ugh the first BOF, the first BOF will have highlighted the key areas where additional work is nee= ded.  The time leading up to the second BOF will need to be spent work= ing through those outstanding issues.
> Second BOFs should not be a r= epeat of the first BOF, with the same issues being raised and the same (uns= atisfactory) responses provided.  The second BOF needs to show that al= l previously identified issues have been resolved and that formation of a W= G is now in order.    ... we should now focus on charter upd= ate and documents as agreed in SF.
>
> Are we inline that the = WG generally should cover all mobility-related issues of Multicast, i.e., e= xtend multicast onto the mobility domain ...

I guess we should.
=
> And the proposed first documents will concentrate on Multicast rec= eption
only and PMIPv6?

Well, I guess the "and" should be weaken= ed. Actually we should come up with a little more than only mcast listeners in PMIPv6. As discussed in SF, we (this is Hitoshi, Gorry & = I) started reworking the MLD parts ...

Let's see, but I suppose we a= gree: there should be some jump in progress!

Cheers,

Thomas

> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:multimob-bounces@i= etf.org] Im Auftrag von Marshall Eubanks
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 26.= April 2009 19:53
> An: multimob@ietf.org
> Betreff: [multi= mob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75
>
> FYI
>
> Be= gin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Adrian Farrel <Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com&g= t;
>> Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT
>> To: routing-discussion@ietf.org
>> Subject: BOF Reques= ts for IETF-75
>> Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <Adrian.= Farrel@huawei.com>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>= > According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF:
>> >>>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directo= rs to
>>>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT)
>= ;> If you plan to submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start&n= bsp; the preparation and let us know as soon as possible.
>>
&= gt;> RFC 5434 is good reading about how to prepare for a successful BOF  session.
>>
>> Adrian and Ross
>> __= _____________________________________________
>> routing-discussio= n mailing list
>> routing-discussion@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-disc= ussion
>>
>
> Regards
> Marshall Eubanks> CEO / AmericaFree= ..TV
>
> _______________________________________________> multimob mailing list
> multimob@ietf.org
> https://ww= w.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
> _______________________________________________
> multimob mailing l= ist
> multimob@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listi= nfo/multimob

--
Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt
=B0 Hamburg U= niversity of Applied Sciences            &nbs= p;     Berliner Tor 7 =B0
=B0 Dept. Informatik, Internet Techn= ologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany =B0
=B0 http://www.haw= -hamburg.de/inet                &nb= sp; Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 =B0
=B0 http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/= ~schmidt    Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 =B0
_______________________= ________________________
multimob mailing list
multimob@ietf.orght= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob

= =0A=0A=0A=0A --0-1479352792-1240846961=:22184-- From schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de Mon Apr 27 09:22:19 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E42B23A6A22 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:22:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.688 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.688 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.561, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] 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 bvDrkTHXbCEK for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.rz.htw-berlin.de (mail2.rz.fhtw-berlin.de [141.45.10.102]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF7FE3A68F0 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:22:12 -0700 (PDT) Envelope-to: multimob@ietf.org Received: from e178170049.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.178.170.49] helo=[192.168.178.20]) by mail2.rz.htw-berlin.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1LyTcC-000HQW-F9; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:23:32 +0200 Message-ID: <49F5DC00.6090804@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:23:28 +0200 From: "Thomas C. Schmidt" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Behcet Sarikaya References: <244FB13EAF194A469E8A9B71923C2D65@your029b8cecfe> <643B0A1D1A13AB498304E0BBC8027848E0427E@S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de> <49F57047.1030206@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> <770024.22184.qm@web111413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <770024.22184.qm@web111413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: multimob@ietf.org, Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Subject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:22:20 -0000 Hi Behcet, actually, we are working with Gorry and Hitoshi on the solution document - I'm not sure about an extra problem statement, as all the issues are already explained in the Mobopts PS. Actually, the problem is understood quite well. So, solutions seem more an issue in the moment, I guess ... Best regards, Thomas Behcet Sarikaya wrote: > Hi Thomas, all, > As we discussed in SF, the draft on > Group Management Protocol Operation Over Wireless Problem Statement > could be improved. Gory said he plans to help starting sometime in May. > If you wish I can give you the xml file. > > Regards, > > Behcet > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Thomas C. Schmidt > *To:* Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de > *Cc:* multimob@ietf.org > *Sent:* Monday, April 27, 2009 3:43:51 AM > *Subject:* Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 > > Hi Dirk, > > yes, it looks like tough work ;) > > Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de wrote: >> Thanks, Marshall, >> For pointing at the time line and document. You are right, this is now > really urgent, especially with regard to RFC quote: >> >> The expectations for a second BOF are generally higher than those for > an initial BOF. In addition to the work done up through the first BOF, > the first BOF will have highlighted the key areas where additional work > is needed. The time leading up to the second BOF will need to be spent > working through those outstanding issues. >> Second BOFs should not be a repeat of the first BOF, with the same > issues being raised and the same (unsatisfactory) responses provided. > The second BOF needs to show that all previously identified issues have > been resolved and that formation of a WG is now in order. ... we > should now focus on charter update and documents as agreed in SF. >> >> Are we inline that the WG generally should cover all mobility-related > issues of Multicast, i.e., extend multicast onto the mobility domain ... > > I guess we should. > >> And the proposed first documents will concentrate on Multicast reception > only and PMIPv6? > > Well, I guess the "and" should be weakened. Actually we should come up > with a little more than only mcast listeners in PMIPv6. As discussed in > SF, we (this is Hitoshi, Gorry & I) started reworking the MLD parts ... > > Let's see, but I suppose we agree: there should be some jump in progress! > > Cheers, > > Thomas > > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:multimob-bounces@ietf.org ] Im > Auftrag von Marshall Eubanks >> Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2009 19:53 >> An: multimob@ietf.org >> Betreff: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 >> >> FYI >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> > From: Adrian Farrel > >> > Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT >> > To: routing-discussion@ietf.org >> > Subject: BOF Requests for IETF-75 >> > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel > >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF: >> > >> >>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors to >> >>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT) >> > If you plan to submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start > the preparation and let us know as soon as possible. >> > >> > RFC 5434 is good reading about how to prepare for a successful BOF > session. >> > >> > Adrian and Ross >> > _______________________________________________ >> > routing-discussion mailing list >> > routing-discussion@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion >> > >> >> Regards >> Marshall Eubanks >> CEO / AmericaFree..TV >> >> _______________________________________________ >> multimob mailing list >> multimob@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob >> _______________________________________________ >> multimob mailing list >> multimob@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob > > -- > Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt > ° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Berliner Tor 7 ° > ° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group 20099 Hamburg, Germany ° > ° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 ° > ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 ° > _______________________________________________ > multimob mailing list > multimob@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > multimob mailing list > multimob@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob -- Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt ° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Berliner Tor 7 ° ° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group 20099 Hamburg, Germany ° ° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 ° ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 ° From behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com Mon Apr 27 11:41:13 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49C63A6F94 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:41:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.476 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.476 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.274, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] 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 Vm0kMIKyAKSO for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:41:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n64.bullet.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (n64.bullet.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [98.136.44.189]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F9C628C115 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:41:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [69.147.84.144] by n64.bullet.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 18:42:33 -0000 Received: from [67.195.9.83] by t6.bullet.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 18:42:33 -0000 Received: from [67.195.9.110] by t3.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 18:42:32 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Apr 2009 18:40:19 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 649365.86250.bm@omp114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 56354 invoked by uid 60001); 27 Apr 2009 18:42:32 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1240857752; bh=o2OrEp74IdfWCqWrnyMXKotawDTZ0FZD3/IdGmCABsQ=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Xz44nhp9g9dr+NtLxdoDGgb6xQLo/KadIDdr7/tkUeNQojGr3KuDMHJF+6Uq4Hfloy3c9FyX03IcGeXPZD5w2CQOSQwUM70ShjaECZl4lPao59HpOszViaYthn1FKSlzRrOYVWgdY6CDa64E3A8c2DKzz+6I8iOMdFiu9NEokt4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cKUqbXR7U+VR3TXK0AKOuGtjGnx2jQScDka5fkV/yHsPiXIX3/CKwIZ8/1nCyzFzbOBAQMNQwOZCj3v7StPhGWTsQrQzv4wc9fl9DRDfQHzBQcNeNiu8C5IHTw4kPJIgLQGceV1SvHBBJCGMiWjz+GbUUBoW2MDtb2e44Tzqq1I=; Message-ID: <580426.56323.qm@web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: OC4TQzoVM1neRygEeiHDFQCobxIEp7zuKsjsSymdaHF9i9RSaMLVm65JNBDW5qLTtjteAWVVWFw5lqkC82HUEI3CbIbAi0wjeHqWIQqhvKzyejivRBYwXS0nKAs2LU_0GFEt4gdhBcn7sb4Y_tja_zCDgeIDMJ1_BG7qjZL0vGPls2.LkmMFFi2WEQyBFBVCyTEObMBW54ThED_dh2R4WiM9ua8sjGhDP7DH_gpW3rCP0W4O8PqQNBBUfANkD28hv_WLYIsLHyY.YAEXWXXJcp7LSB5hVhBakackJP2Mq16Kzz3mNOysZiZnHtciJrIVsIbxjsMr Received: from [206.16.17.212] by web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:42:32 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1277.35 YahooMailWebService/0.7.289.1 References: <244FB13EAF194A469E8A9B71923C2D65@your029b8cecfe> <643B0A1D1A13AB498304E0BBC8027848E0427E@S4DE8PSAAQC.mitte.t-com.de> <49F57047.1030206@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> <770024.22184.qm@web111413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <49F5DC00.6090804@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:42:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Behcet Sarikaya To: "Thomas C. Schmidt" In-Reply-To: <49F5DC00.6090804@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-664582868-1240857752=:56323" Cc: multimob@ietf.org, Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Subject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75 X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya List-Id: Multicast Mobility List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:41:13 -0000 --0-664582868-1240857752=:56323 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Thomas,=0A=A0 That's what we did in the first BoF and realized that the = problem was not understood at all.=0A=A0 Regards,=0A=0ABehcet=0A=0A=0A=0A= =0A________________________________=0AFrom: Thomas C. Schmidt =0ATo: Behcet Sarikaya =0ACc: mult= imob@ietf.org; Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de=0ASent: Monday, April 27, 2009 11:2= 3:28 AM=0ASubject: Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75=0A=0AHi Beh= cet,=0A=0Aactually, we are working with Gorry and Hitoshi on the solution d= ocument - I'm not sure about an extra problem statement, as all the issues = are already explained in the Mobopts PS. Actually, the problem is understoo= d quite well.=0A=0ASo, solutions seem more an issue in the moment, I guess = ....=0A=0ABest regards,=0A=0AThomas=0A=0A=0ABehcet Sarikaya wrote:=0A> Hi Th= omas, all,=0A>=A0 As we discussed in SF, the draft on=0A> Group Management = Protocol Operation Over Wireless Problem Statement=0A> could be improved. G= ory said he plans to help starting sometime in May.=0A>=A0 If you wish I ca= n give you the xml file.=0A>=A0 Regards,=0A>=A0 Behcet=0A> =0A> -----------= -------------------------------------------------------------=0A> *From:* T= homas C. Schmidt =0A> *To:* Dirk.von-Hug= o@telekom.de=0A> *Cc:* multimob@ietf.org=0A> *Sent:* Monday, April 27, 2009= 3:43:51 AM=0A> *Subject:* Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75=0A>= =0A> Hi Dirk,=0A> =0A> yes, it looks like tough work ;)=0A> =0A> Dirk.von-= Hugo@telekom.de wrote:=0A>>=A0 Thanks, Ma= rshall,=0A>>=A0 For pointing at the time line and document. You are right, = this is now =0A> really urgent, especially with regard to RFC quote:=0A>> = =0A>>=A0 The expectations for a second BOF are generally higher than those = for =0A> an initial BOF.=A0 In addition to the work done up through the fir= st BOF, the first BOF will have highlighted the key areas where additional = work is needed.=A0 The time leading up to the second BOF will need to be sp= ent working through those outstanding issues.=0A>>=A0 Second BOFs should no= t be a repeat of the first BOF, with the same =0A> issues being raised and = the same (unsatisfactory) responses provided.=A0 The second BOF needs to sh= ow that all previously identified issues have been resolved and that format= ion of a WG is now in order.=A0 =A0 ... we should now focus on charter upda= te and documents as agreed in SF.=0A>> =0A>>=A0 Are we inline that the WG g= enerally should cover all mobility-related =0A> issues of Multicast, i.e., = extend multicast onto the mobility domain ...=0A> =0A> I guess we should.= =0A> =0A>>=A0 And the proposed first documents will concentrate on Multicas= t reception=0A> only and PMIPv6?=0A> =0A> Well, I guess the "and" should be= weakened. Actually we should come up with a little more than only mcast li= steners in PMIPv6. As discussed in SF, we (this is Hitoshi, Gorry & I) star= ted reworking the MLD parts ...=0A> =0A> Let's see, but I suppose we agree:= there should be some jump in progress!=0A> =0A> Cheers,=0A> =0A> Thomas=0A= > =0A> =0A>>=A0 -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----=0A>>=A0 Von: multimob-b= ounces@ietf.org =0A> [mailto:multimob-bo= unces@ietf.org ] Im Auftrag von Marshall = Eubanks=0A>>=A0 Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2009 19:53=0A>>=A0 An: multimo= b@ietf.org =0A>>=A0 Betreff: [multimob] Fwd: BOF = Requests for IETF-75=0A>> =0A>>=A0 FYI=0A>> =0A>>=A0 Begin forwarded messag= e:=0A>> =0A>> > From: Adrian Farrel >=0A>> > Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT=0A>>= > To: routing-discussion@ietf.org =0A>= > > Subject: BOF Requests for IETF-75=0A>> > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel >=0A>> >=0A>> > H= i,=0A>> >=0A>> > According to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF:=0A>= > >=0A>> >>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors to= =0A>> >>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT)=0A>> > If you plan to = submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please start=A0 =0A> the preparatio= n and let us know as soon as possible.=0A>> >=0A>> > RFC 5434 is good readi= ng about how to prepare for a successful BOF=A0 =0A> session.=0A>> >=0A>> >= Adrian and Ross=0A>> > _______________________________________________=0A>= > > routing-discussion mailing list=0A>> > routing-discussion@ietf.org =0A>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listin= fo/routing-discussion=0A>> >=0A>> =0A>>=A0 Regards=0A>>=A0 Marshall Eubanks= =0A>>=A0 CEO / AmericaFree..TV =0A>> =0A>>=A0 _____= __________________________________________=0A>>=A0 multimob mailing list=0A= >>=A0 multimob@ietf.org =0A>>=A0 https://www.ietf= ..org/mailman/listinfo/multimob=0A>>=A0 ____________________________________= ___________=0A>>=A0 multimob mailing list=0A>>=A0 multimob@ietf.org =0A>>=A0 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob= =0A> =0A> -- Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt=0A> =B0 Hamburg University of Appl= ied Sciences=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Berliner Tor 7 =B0=0A> =B0 = Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group=A0 =A0 20099 Hamburg, Germany= =B0=0A> =B0 http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 =B0=0A> =B0 http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de= /~schmidt=A0 =A0 Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 =B0=0A> ___________________________= ____________________=0A> multimob mailing list=0A> multimob@ietf.org =0A> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob=0A>= =0A> =0A> ----------------------------------------------------------------= --------=0A> =0A> _______________________________________________=0A> multi= mob mailing list=0A> multimob@ietf.org=0A> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis= tinfo/multimob=0A=0A-- =0AProf. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt=0A=B0 Hamburg Univers= ity of Applied Sciences=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Berliner Tor 7 = =B0=0A=B0 Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group=A0 =A0 20099 Hambur= g, Germany =B0=0A=B0 http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 =B0=0A=B0 http://www.informatik.haw-hamb= urg.de/~schmidt=A0 =A0 Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 =B0=0A_______________________= ________________________=0Amultimob mailing list=0Amultimob@ietf.org=0Ahttp= s://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob=0A=0A=0A=0A --0-664582868-1240857752=:56323 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Thomas,
=0A
  That's what we did in t= he first BoF and realized that the problem was not understood at all.
= =0A
  Regards,
=0A
 
=0A
Behcet
= =0A

=0A
=0A
=0AFrom: Thomas C. Schmidt <schmidt= @informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
To:<= /SPAN> Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
Cc: multimob@ietf.org; Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.d= e
Sent: Monday, April 27= , 2009 11:23:28 AM
Subject:<= /B> Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75

Hi Behcet,
actually, we are working with Gorry and Hitoshi on the solution docum= ent - I'm not sure about an extra problem statement, as all the issues are = already explained in the Mobopts PS. Actually, the problem is understood qu= ite well.

So, solutions seem more an issue in the moment, I guess ..= ..

Best regards,

Thomas


Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
&= gt; Hi Thomas, all,
>  As we discussed in SF, the draft on
> Group Management Protocol Operation Over Wireless Problem State= ment
> could be improved. Gory said he plans to help starting sometim= e in May.
>  If you wish I can give you the xml file.
>&nb= sp; Regards,
>  Behcet
>
> ------------------------= ------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Thomas C. = Schmidt <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.d= e>
> *To:* Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de
> *= Cc:* multimob@ietf.org
> *Sent:* Monday, April 27, 2009 3:43:51 AM=
> *Subject:* Re: [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75
> > Hi Dirk,
>
> yes, it looks like tough work ;)
>
> Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de <mailto:Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> wrote:
>>  Thanks, Marshall= ,
>>  For pointing at the time line and document. You are rig= ht, this is now
> really urgent, especially with regard to RFC quote= :
>>
>>  The expectations for a second BOF are gene= rally higher than those for
> an initial BOF.  In addition to t= he work done up through the first BOF, the first BOF will have highlighted = the key areas where additional work is needed.  The time leading up to= the second BOF will need to be spent working through those outstanding iss= ues.
>>  Second BOFs should not be a repeat of the first BOF,= with the same
> issues being raised and the same (unsatisfactory) responses provided.  The second BOF needs to show that all previously= identified issues have been resolved and that formation of a WG is now in = order.    ... we should now focus on charter update and documents= as agreed in SF.
>>
>>  Are we inline that the WG = generally should cover all mobility-related
> issues of Multicast, i= ..e., extend multicast onto the mobility domain ...
>
> I guess= we should.
>
>>  And the proposed first documents wil= l concentrate on Multicast reception
> only and PMIPv6?
>
&= gt; Well, I guess the "and" should be weakened. Actually we should come up = with a little more than only mcast listeners in PMIPv6. As discussed in SF,= we (this is Hitoshi, Gorry & I) started reworking the MLD parts ...>
> Let's see, but I suppose we agree: there should be some jump= in progress!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas
>
>
>>  -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-= ----
>>  Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org &l= t;mailto:multimob-bounces@ietf.org>
> [mailto:= multimob-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:mult= imob-bounces@ietf.org>] Im Auftrag von Marshall Eubanks
>>&= nbsp; Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2009 19:53
>>  An: multimob= @ietf.org <mailto:multimob@ietf.org>
>>  Betreff= : [multimob] Fwd: BOF Requests for IETF-75
>>
>>  FYI
>> >>  Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> > Fro= m: Adrian Farrel <Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com
> <= ;mailto:Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com>>
>> > = Date: April 26, 2009 12:47:20 PM EDT
>> > To: routing-discussion@ietf.org <mailto:routing-dis= cussion@ietf.org>
>> > Subject: BOF Requests for IETF-75=
>> > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <Adrian.Farrel@hu= awei.com
> <mailto:Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com>>
&= gt;> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Accordi= ng to the cut-off dates list for the 75th IETF:
>> >
>>= ; >>> June 8, Monday - Cutoff date for requests to Area Directors = to
>> >>> schedule BOFs at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC/GMT)
&= gt;> > If you plan to submit a request for a BOF in Stockholm please = start 
> the preparation and let us know as soon as possible.>> >
>> > RFC 5434 is good reading about how to prep= are for a successful BOF 
> session.
>> >
>&g= t; > Adrian and Ross
>> > __________________________________= _____________
>> > routing-discussion mailing list
>> = > routing-discussion@ietf.org= <mailto:routing-discussion@ietf.org>
&= gt;> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discus= sion
>> >
>>
>>  Regards
>>= ;  Marshall Eubanks
>>  CEO / AmericaFree..TV <http:/= /americafree.tv/>
>>
>>  _______________________= ________________________
>>  multimob mailing list
>>= ;  multimob@ietf.org <mailto:multimob@ietf.org>
>>= ;  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
>= >  _______________________________________________
>> = ; multimob mailing list
>>  multimob@ietf.org <mailto:<= A href=3D"mailto:multimob@ietf.org" ymailto=3D"mailto:multimob@ietf.org">mu= ltimob@ietf.org>
>>  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/list= info/multimob
>
> -- Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt
> = =B0 Hamburg University of Applied Sciences         = ;         Berliner Tor 7 =B0
> =B0 Dept. Informat= ik, Internet Technologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany =B0
= > =B0 http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet          &= nbsp;       Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 =B0
> =B0 http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: +49-40-428= 75-8409 =B0
> _______________________________________________
>= multimob mailing list
> multimob@ietf.org <mailto:multimob@ietf= ..org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
= >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------= --------------------
>
> _____________________________________= __________
> multimob mailing list
> multimob@ietf.org
&g= t; https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob

--
Prof. D= r. Thomas C. Schmidt
=B0 Hamburg University of Applied Sciences      =             Berliner Tor 7 =B0
=B0 Dept. I= nformatik, Internet Technologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany = =B0
=B0 http:= //www.haw-hamburg.de/inet            &nbs= p;     Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 =B0
=B0 http://www.informatik.haw= -hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 =B0
_______= ________________________________________
multimob mailing list
multimo= b@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob

=0A=0A=0A=0A --0-664582868-1240857752=:56323--