Re: Call for adoption confirmation: draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02

Hi Dirk,

Tanks for the review, we will modify the doc accordingly.

Pierrick

De : dmm [mailto:[email protected]] De la part de [email protected]
Envoyé : mardi 1 décembre 2015 15:32
À : [email protected]; [email protected]
Objet : Re: [DMM] Call for adoption confirmation: draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02

Dear co-chairs,  all,
I join early adopters of the draft and agree that it should become WG document.

To the co-authors I propose to check whether all what I detected as nits/typos  really are ones:

p.3:

multihomed achitecture =>  multihomed architecture

using GRE as mobile tuneling => using GRE as mobile tunneling

Tunnel-2 (ober DSL) => Tunnel-2 (over DSL)

Fig.1:

Flow0=-4 => Flow-4



P.4:

Care-of-Adresse => Care-of-Address

one MAG/LMA link, i.e. IP-in-IP tunnel, tunnel can be used => one MAG/LMA link, i.e. IP-in-IP tunnel, can be used

This document overcome => This document overcomes



p.5:

delegated mobile network prefix. => delegated mobile network prefix (DMNP).



> BTW IMHO also the acronym for MAG Multipath-Binding (MMB) should be introduced anywhere around Fig. 2.



p.6:

ans thus => and thus

may require the RG and the to

   exchange interface metrics

=> may require the RG and the LMA/mobility anchor to

   exchange interface metrics



p.7:

on a flow basis => on a per-flow basis

care-addresses => care-of addresses



p.8:

Here the parameters to be explained/defined are missing – e.g.



If-ATT



    This 8-bit field identifies the Access-Technology type …



If-Label



    This 8-bit field represents the interface label …

Etc.



p.9:

from the Mobile Node Identifier Option

      Subtypes registry.

=> from the Mobile Node Identifier Option

      Subtypes registry at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters>.

Or perhaps better: include direct reference to draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids ??





Also I wonder whether not some more security considerations should be added like that a new risk emerges in case not all multipath tunnels, tunnel technologies, and used access links don’t exhibit similar high security ?



Thanks!


Best Regards
Dirk
From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dapeng Liu
Sent: Mittwoch, 25. November 2015 17:22
To: dmm
Subject: [DMM] Call for adoption confirmation: draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02

Hello all,

In IETF94, we initiated the call for adoption for the draft:
draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02>:  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02
Seems have got sufficient support during the meeting. We'd like to confirm the call for adoption in the mailing list for 2 weeks.
Please send your opinion and comments to the list before December 9.


Thanks,
------
Best Regards,
Dapeng&Jouni





--

------
Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm