Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group

Hello Jouni,

I think S2-051260 is an outstanding design document
that everyone in [mext] should read.  From it, we
"SHOULD" have seen a much better designed system.
The result, however, would not be recognizable from
figure 1 and figure 2 except by a quite optimistic
LTE expert.  I started to think about how to quantify
the huge jump in complexity between the stated design
goals in the document and the result of S1 --> S$\infty$
but my head started to hurt... never mind Ga --> Gz
and the 200 IEs for GTP, and all the other modules.

Is it possible to have some discussion on my proposal
[i.e., "On the IETF side, we should specify: ..."] at
IETF 82?  I realize it is quite broad and would
probably engender a lot of discussion, but it's a
discussion that needs to happen.

Regards,
Charlie P.




On 11/3/2011 2:02 PM, jouni korhonen wrote:
> Charlie,
>
> It was 2005, a warm May week in Athens when SA2, RAN2 and RAN3 had a meeting., and EPS took its first steps.. This, for example, was on a table: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_sa/WG2_Arch/TSGS2_46_Athens/Docs/S2-051260.zip
> That did/does not too bad actually.  I still remember some operator folk standing up back then and giving a loud comment "This science fiction.." ;-)
>
> - Jouni
>
> On Nov 3, 2011, at 7:49 PM, Charles E. Perkins wrote:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> For several years now, I have been studying 4G wireless
>> network architecture and wondering why there is such a
>> disconnect between, say, LTE mobility management and
>> IETF mobility management.  Mobile IP has a secondary
>> role, to say the least.  IETF approaches may be seen to
>> have several inadequacies, and 3GPP approaches also show
>> some major problems.  I think that it is important for
>> the IETF to devote some serious effort towards bringing
>> these two worlds together, because current directions
>> are leading towards an impossibly baroque, wasteful,
>> nearly impenetrable mess of complication.  The effects
>> overall is loss of performance and opportunity.
>>
>> Taking a look at S101 and S103, we can immediately
>> recognize that they are drastically more complicated,
>> restrictive, and operationally more expensive than
>> Mobile IP.  Taking a look at S102, we immediately see
>> that 3GPP mobility management threatens to be different
>> for each class of application, with an unnecessary
>> per-application proliferation of servers, protocol,
>> permissions, traffic controls, configuration, and so on.
>> Taking a look at recent efforts towards WiFi offload,
>> we see the same trend of complication and software
>> hacks that could be avoided with proper IETF
>> approaches.
>>
>> On the IETF side, we should specify:
>> - Integrated authentication for access control
>>   as well as IP address continuity
>> - Location-assisted handovers (think MIIS / ANDSF)
>> - Modular/alternative security
>> - Signaling on control plane, user traffic on
>>   data plane
>> - Alternative tunneling (GTP is simply not going
>>   to die a quick death, to say the least)
>> - geez, the list does go on, but no one reads
>>   long lists ...
>> ...
>>
>> I don't know if we already have 3GPP liaison, but
>> if we do the communication channels don't seem to
>> have had very much effect within the [mext] work
>> lately.
>>
>> My fear is that if we don't take action, we are
>> choosing a future that is ever more complicated,
>> non-extendible, non-flexible, radio technology
>> specific, application specific, and bug-ridden.
>> In short, everything we don't want the Internet
>> to be.  And, I am sure no one here doubts that
>> the Internet of the future is all high-speed
>> wireless.  Where is the IETF going to be?
>>
>> If the [mext] working group is shut down, there
>> is no natural place for this work to happen.
>> Therefore, I hope that [mext] would NOT shut
>> down, and instead recharter to tackle these
>> urgent problems.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Charlie P.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/28/2011 5:08 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> We are making some changes to the working group. While we have
>>> successfully published a large number of specifications in recent years,
>>> recently it has been difficult to make progress in the group. The chairs
>>> and ADs have looked at the situation and we believe we need a new focus
>>> and a bit of new organization as well. We are terminating the working
>>> group and moving the one remaining active work item to a new working
>>> group, the "DMM" working group. Here's what is going to happen:
>>>
>>> o Jouni Korhonen and Julien Laganier will become the chairs of the group.
>>>
>>> o The group will meet in Taipei (there is a MEXT slot in the agenda).
>>>
>>> o The charter of the group will be changed to focus only on the
>>> distributed mobility effort. We should discuss the details of this
>>> charter change both on the list and in the meeting. The meeting agenda
>>> should reserve some time both for technical discussions as well as the
>>> charter discussion.
>>>
>>> o Once the discussion on the list and in the meeting has finished, we
>>> will rename the group to "DMM" and put the new charter in effect.
>>>
>>> o If there are any other specifications that people would like to
>>> publish beyond the distributed mobility work, we can offer to AD sponsor
>>> them to RFCs outside the new working group. If there is some significant
>>> new activity, we can create new working groups for that.
>>>
>>> Comments and feedback and/or alternate suggestions on this plan are
>>> welcome.
>>>
>>> We would like to thank Marcelo for your many years of service in MEXT.
>>> We could not have completed all the work we did without your energy and
>>> push for high quality results. We would also like to thank Jouni for
>>> taking on this new challenge, and Julien for continuing the work in this
>>> space.
>>>
>>> Jari and Ralph
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MEXT mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MEXT mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>
>