Re: DMM WG next steps

On Mar 12, 2014, at 5:11 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <[email protected]> wrote:

> Also, I propose to include the following text. Based on the discussions we had in the NETEXT WG meet on last Friday, I assume Brian and the DMM chairs agreed in principle agreed to allow any PMIPv6 maintenance related extensions to be completed in DMM WG. Once the NETEXT closes, we will have a single mobility working group and that will be DMM, just as we had MEXT in the past.

This is/was my understanding as well. I would, however, emphasise the 
the word "maintenance". There is a difference between a new protocol
work and maintaining a protocol.

> "The DMM working group will also allow extensions to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol, specified in RFC 5213 and RFC 5844. These extensions are maintenance-oriented and incremental in nature. Primarily to address any protocol gaps required to support  deployments and other standards development organizations using the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol in their system architectures."

Looks as a good basis. Thx.

- Jouni


> 
> Regards
> Sri
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Alper Yegin <[email protected]>
> Date: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 6:04 AM
> To: Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [DMM] DMM WG next steps
> 
> Jouni,
> 
> Thanks for the text.
> 
>       DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment
>       model, by distributing mobility functions more closer to the user.
> 
> 
> This part excludes the approaches that place the mobility function on or near the CN.
> 
> I recommend the following revision:
> 
> 
>       DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment
>       model, by distributing mobility functions more closer to the user
>       and/or its corresponding nodes.
> 
> Alper
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
> 
>> Folks,
>> 
>> DMM WG has done some progress lately. The requirements document has
>> already left the building and the gap analysis is heading to WGLC as
>> we speak. It is about the time to think what we should do next now
>> that we have grown out of the infancy. 
>> 
>> A smaller group of mobility enthusiasts have been discussing about
>> possible next steps and how the possible new charter would look like. 
>> The current very draft text template can be found here:
>> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter
>> 
>> As you can see, we are still in early stages and all input it welcome.
>> Obviously, possible re-chartering depends on many things. For example,
>> things like getting the gap analysis out of the WG and what the IESG
>> says. Nothing has been fixed or decided yet. Anyhow, we will start the
>> discussion on re-chartering with the expectation that the DMM WG will
>> re-charter and continue developing new solutions and/or enhancements
>> in the IP mobility space.
>> 
>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>