Re: WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-01

Hi Behcet

See inline, please.

Regards,
Seil Jeon


-----Original Message-----
From: Behcet Sarikaya [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 4:24 PM
To: Seil Jeon <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [DMM] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-01

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Seil Jeon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Behcet,
>
> As I was not there, what discussions was given.
> However, let me speak a few words.
>
> The specs. you referenced seems talking about need of different levels 
> of mobility support, e.g. high/medium/low mobility and so on.
> Within the frame, I think having a proper level of mobility support 
> based on IP session continuity and IP address reachability for an 
> application, with the defined source IP address type request will make 
> sense in the scope of mobility support in the specs.
>

Did I say below that it does or does not say these things?

What I said is the current thinking is to tie it to the UE asking for mobility support or not.

SJ) Yes, it is based on a terminal-driven approach. We may consider a network-driven approach, if submitted by a person being interested in.

If you have time, I would recommend spending it on coming up with a solution for the so-called sustained IP address.

SJ) I spent my time for it.

Behcet
> Besides, as you know, the spec. currently remains at 0.2 version, 
> describing work items briefly and concisely. It doesn't constraint 
> potentials for on-demand mobility. And we don't know how/where the direction will be going.
>
> Regards,
> Seil Jeon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Behcet Sarikaya
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 4:52 PM
> To: Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DMM] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-01
>
> Hello Folks,
>
> At IETF 95 session, there was some discussion on the mention of on 
> demand mobility in 3GPP 5G documents, e.g. 23.799.
>
> It seems like 3GPP meaning of on demand mobility is that the UE asks 
> or demands mobility support or not.
>
> So that has nothing to do with the sustained IP addresses.
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Jouni Korhonen 
> <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> This mail starts two week WGLC for the I-D:
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-01
>>
>> The WGLC ends 12/15/2015.
>>
>> Provide your reviews and comments to the mailing list. For the better 
>> tracking of issues and proposed changed use the Issue Tracker to 
>> submit your issues/proposals.
>>
>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>