Re: DMM WG next steps
Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.nemo |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Alper, Thanks. Looks good (or better than the original) to me. - Jouni On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:04 PM, Alper Yegin <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >