Re: [MEXT] draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00

Hi Behcet, 

On Jul 5, 2011, at 14:42, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Hi Romain,
> A quick review of your draft.
> On HMIPv6, I agree with your observations.
> I think that DMA and DLMA are PMIPv6 dmm solutions and so maybe not so 
> interesting for Mext.

Yes, we tried to be exhaustive on the DMM topic, but may consider refocus the draft on MIPv6 only. 

> ON DMI,it is a little archaic and also does not address all issues of DMM. It 
> just gives some good ideas, I think.
> 
> You mentioned separation of control and data planes which is from 
> yokota-dmm-scenario. This is a tough requirement to satisfy within MIPv6 domain. 
> I think that one more requirement of no extensions to MIPv6 has been mentioned 
> in Beijing meeting. So the drafts can be measured on how close they come to this 
> requirement.

I agree, we will add some text to discuss whether the solutions needs modification on the MN side, on the HA side, or both. 

> Lastly, you have not covered newer drafts like draft-sarikaya-mext-multicastdmm.

Our draft was submitted in early May, and it seems yours was submitted later. But we'll consider it for the next revision. 

> It would be more productive to review the dmm solution drafts on mext list, as 
> Julien mentioned.

Yes, the main purpose of our draft was to summarize the various existing PS/solutions documents and should not prevent people from providing more thorough comments on specific drafts.

Thank you,
romain