Re: [MEXT] Mobile IPv6 label and Mobile IPv6 protocol changes (was: FW: Agenda requests for Prague meeting)

Alex:

What is your point? You're not happy with the agenda? Please be specific.

--julien

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 22/03/2011 17:45, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>
>> El 22/03/11 16:37, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
>>>
>>> Le 22/03/2011 15:52, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> so, you ave downgraded you statement of several itemS being non
>>>> MIP related and all the DMM discussion being non MIP related to
>>>> just one single agenda item...
>>>
>>> You asked one, I told one.
>>>
>>> Another is the 3rd item (HAC is not a Mobile IPv6 entity, TLS is
>>> not a MIP6 Type Code, etc.)
>>>
>>
>> you mean the presentation of the draft entitled "Negotiation of
>> security protocol for Mobile IPv6 operation" which in its 7 pages
>> mentions the term Mobile IP over 24 times????, really?
>
> Yes, I meant so, and here is why.
>
> If I understand it correctly, HAC seems to be a new box with two
> distinctive parts: one running a non-Mobile IP protocol (TLS tunnelled
> Req/Resp, i.e. non Mobile IPv6) and another part which runs pure Mobile
> IPv6 (BU/BAck).
>
> Me too: my draft's MR has two distinctive parts: one running a
> non-Mobile IP protocol (ICMPv6 extensions for prefixes, i.e. non Mobile
> IPv6) and another part which runs pure Mobile IPv6 (BU/BAck with NEMOv6)
> ("MR" is all over the draft and its definition is that it runs Mobile
> IPv6 with NEMOv6.)
>
> (On another hand, e.g. draft-hampel-mext-ro-without-ha-00, another
> agenda item, seems indeed to be modifications to the Mobile IPv6
> protocol (new HoA Support Mobility Option in Mobility Header).  That
> seems more appropriate to the MEXT agenda if MEXT is defined as being
> Mobile IPv6-only work.)
>
> That is why I think some items seem little appropriate to the agenda.
>
> Or maybe MEXT is not only about modifications to Mobile IPv6 but it is
> also something else, at which point more agenda items should be accepted
> in all fairness.
>
>>>> great, it seems we are making good progress here.
>>>>
>>>> about the particular item you mention: i understand this is the
>>>> motivation for the dmm work and understanding the perceived
>>>> probelms is needed to figure out how we can use MIP to deal with
>>>>  the perceived problem.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> However, if people think this is out of scope for MEXT, i am fine
>>>> to discuss whether we should keep it in the agenda or not
>>>
>>> I think it is worth discussing how much relationship do the
>>> current agenda items have to the Mobile IPv6 protocol, and whether
>>> that relationship is as much as other agenda requests.
>>
>> sure, that is what we are doing, but if your point is that
>> draft-patil-mext-sec-negotiate-00.txt is as closely related to the
>> MIPv6 protocol as IRON, then i am not sure we may be able to find a
>> common ground for understanding each other....
>
> I am trying to understand this.
>
> I look at ironmike (IRON and MOBIKE) and it reads like using IKE for
> supporting mobile nodes changing their addresses.  I think it could be
> used together with Mobile IPv6: use MOBIKE mobility when in an IRON
> domain or otherwise use Mobile IPv6 when handing over to the
> non-IRON parts of Internet.
>
> (I read "IRON tradespace" as I read "SDO")
>
> I may not understand ironmike correctly, I just suppose.
>
> IMHO.
>
> Alex
> [*] draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01
>>
>> Regards, marcelo
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> El 22/03/11 15:35, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 22/03/2011 15:06, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please point exactly what item in the agenda is NOT about
>>>>>> the Mobile IP protocol.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 6th.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> El 20/03/11 15:13, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcelo, Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a doubt about the reasoning behind declining Fred's
>>>>>>> request of agenda item.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The current agenda
>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/agenda/mext.txt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> contains items IMHO only remotely or very vaguely related
>>>>>>> to the Mobile IPv6 protocol per se. Additionally, agenda's
>>>>>>>  DMM core item has a discussion which does not seem to
>>>>>>> converge on the use of Mobile IPv6.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In this sense, I am not sure the typical statements of
>>>>>>> MEXT doing _only_ Mobile IPv6 stuff holds any longer, as I
>>>>>>> see it today.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fred's "IRON and MOBIKE" draft-templin-ironmike-00.txt is
>>>>>>> related to IKE which is related to Mobile IPv6 security.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not trying to advertise Fred's draft particularly. I
>>>>>>> am saying this because...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have the same agenda problem with similar work I do
>>>>>>> (RA-based routing) for mobility, i.e. boxes which may run
>>>>>>> Mobile IPv6 but need something else than Mobile IPv6 Type
>>>>>>> Codes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is my doubt about MEXT activity and agenda planning,
>>>>>>> thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 14/03/2011 19:56, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is outside the scope of the MEXT wg, which is
>>>>>>>> limited to the the Mobile IPv6 protocol. Hence, we
>>>>>>>> decline your request.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards, marcelo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> El 14/03/11 18:57, Templin, Fred L escribió:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Marcelo (and Julien),
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In January, I posted several messages on a new approach
>>>>>>>>> to mobility management known as IRON:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04529.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04535.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04543.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04546.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The base IRON architecture document has now been
>>>>>>>>> published as an experimental RFC of the IRTF Routing
>>>>>>>>> Research Group:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6179.txt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and the mechanisms and operational practices are
>>>>>>>>> documented in the following active Internet drafts:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-vet
>>>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-seal
>>>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-ironmike-00
>>>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-iron-pm-00
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd like to get a 20min MEXT slot at IETF80 to present
>>>>>>>>>  the approach. Please let me know if that works for
>>>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fred [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From:
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>>>>>  On Behalf Of marcelo bagnulo braun Sent: Wednesday,
>>>>>>>>>>  March 09, 2011 8:32 AM To: mext Subject: [MEXT]
>>>>>>>>>> Agenda requests for Prague meeting
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please send slot requests for the prague meeting to
>>>>>>>>>> the chairs. please note that we are meeting on
>>>>>>>>>> friday.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT
>>>>>>>>>> mailing list [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT
>>>>>>>> mailing list [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT
>>>>>>> mailing list [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing
>>>>>>  list [email protected]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing
>>>>> list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing
>>>> list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list
>>> [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list
>> [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>