Re: [dmm] #16: Clarifications
Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.nemo |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I would like to see a note that states why MIP RO or PMIP LR are not adequate. Just for the completeness.. Is it because a single HA/LMA is still maintained? - Jouni. On Apr 15, 2013, at 11:35 PM, dmm issue tracker <[email protected]> wrote: > #16: Clarifications > > 14) Section 4.1 > > REQ1: Distributed deployment > > o This requirement must imho state why route optimization (MIPv6) or > localized routing (PMIPv6) as of today are not adequate/enough. The > requirement text itself is OK but the question above needs an answer. > > -- > ------------------------------------+------------------------------------ > Reporter: [email protected] | Owner: [email protected] > Type: defect | Status: new > Priority: major | Milestone: > Component: requirements | Version: > Severity: In WG Last Call | Keywords: > ------------------------------------+------------------------------------ > > Ticket URL: <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmm/trac/ticket/16> > dmm <http://tools.ietf.org/dmm/> >