Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01.txt

Hello Dapeng,

Here are me few comments:

       It is typically the role of a connection
       manager to distinguish application capabilities and trigger the
       mobility support accordingly.  

and

      Multiple IP address management: ability of the mobile node to
      simultaneously use multiple IP addresses and select the best one
      (from an anchoring point of view) to use on a per-session/
      application/service basis.  Depending on the mobile node support,
      this functionality might require more or less support from the
      network side.  This is typically the role of a connection manager.

I'm not sure if this is really a connection manager issue. This is more of a source address selection issue.


       Mobility management and traffic redirection should only be
       triggered due to IP mobility reasons, that is when the MN moves
       from the point of attachment where the IP flow was originally
       initiated.

Mobility management and traffic redirection may also be triggered due to load balancing. Maybe we should acknowledge such non-mobility related triggers, and state that they are outside the scope of this document.


Should we described the terms IP session continuity and IP address reachability? This document is solely focusing on the former, we should state that.


When doing the gap analysis, we better break down the benefits we are seeking and evaluate existing solutions with respect to them (e.g., signaling reduction, use of most direct data-path, etc. ). For example, regular use of HMIP helps with the former, but not the latter. But, using RCoA as source address helps with both (but it has other issues -- when MN moves outside the local domain).

Alper





















On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Liu Dapeng wrote:

> Hello folks:
> 
> To make good progress in Berlin meeting, it is better for us to start
> discussion and resolve comments in the list now. Please help to review
> and feel free to send comments.
> 
> quick summary of the draft:
> -----
> Section 4 'DMM practice' mainly analyses the mobility deployment
> practice in WLAN and 3GPP network. Both client-based and network-based
> mobility protocols are discussed.
> 
> Section 5 'Gap analysis' tentatively discusses the gaps. Please have a
> look whether you agree on those gaps and whether you want to propose
> any new ones. Any input from the group will be welcomed.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dapeng Liu
> 
> 2013/6/17 Zuniga, Juan Carlos <[email protected]>:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> We have posted an updated version of the current practices and gap analysis draft. We would like to make one more update before Berlin, so your comments and feedback are very welcome.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Juan Carlos et al.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 11:07 AM
>> To: Carlos J. Bernardos; H Anthony Chan; Zuniga, Juan Carlos; Anthony Chan; Dapeng Liu; Zuniga, Juan Carlos; Pierrick Seite
>> Subject: New Version Notification fordraft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01.txt
>> 
>> 
>> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01.txt
>> has been successfully submitted by Dapeng Liu and posted to the
>> IETF repository.
>> 
>> Filename:        draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis
>> Revision:        01
>> Title:           Distributed Mobility Management: Current practices and gap analysis
>> Creation date:   2013-06-17
>> Group:           dmm
>> Number of pages: 21
>> URL:             http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01.txt
>> Status:          http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis
>> Htmlized:        http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01
>> Diff:            http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>   The present document analyses deplyment practices of existing
>>   mobility protocols in a distributed mobility management environment.
>>   It also identifies some limitations compared to the expected
>>   functionality of a fully distributed mobility management system.  The
>>   comparison is made taking into account the identified DMM
>>   requirements.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The IETF Secretariat
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> ------
> Best Regards,
> Dapeng Liu
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm