Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-08
Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mip6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAKD1Yr1-YRtMwN+BFpWL4oyb-CXMAEmiZTDpOZ42VLBMiHnBpA__21156.050990294$1481024664$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com> |
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Moses, Danny <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it is important to describe that application developer can > influence the type of service the IP session is receiving, while being > vague about the mechanism of address allocation. Since you are concern with > the draft using the term ‘address’ and I am concern with using the term > ‘prefix’, I tried using the term ‘network resources’. Yes, it is vague, but > that is the intention. > Ok, but what other type of resource can result in the MN being able to use an IP address? It seems to me that only an IP address or a prefix will qualify. And if allocating address on request is recommended, then that only leaves a prefix. If there are other types of resource that I'm missing, then "resource" might be OK, as long as it has appropriate examples. But if the only two options are "address" and "prefix" and "address" is not recommended, then saying "resource" is at best unhelpful and at worst misleading. Can you explain why you are concerned with using the term "prefix"? _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm