Re: rechartering draft text updated
Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.nemo |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:05 AM, Alper Yegin <[email protected]> wrote: > You already have text for that: "Forwarding path and signalling management" > > You can use that name for the deliverable. Right. I was, though, expecting something that I could copy-paste directly. Any desires for timelines? Cheers, 49.1972.0112.1111.1711.0105.00 > > Alper > > > > > > On Mar 26, 2014, at 8:25 PM, Jouni wrote: > >> >> On Mar 26, 2014, at 8:11 PM, Alper Yegin wrote: >> >>> >>> On Mar 26, 2014, at 5:47 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 26, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Alper Yegin <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Jouni, >>>>> >>>>> DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment >>>>> model, by distributing forwarding functions at optimal location; for >>>>> example, closer either to the mobile user or the corresponding node. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> s/user/node >>>> >>>> Ack. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Although the maintenance of stable home address(es) and/or prefix(es) >>>>> and upper level sessions is a desirable goal when mobile hosts/routers >>>>> change their point of attachment to the Internet, it is not a strict >>>>> requirement. Mobile hosts/routers should not assume that IP >>>>> addressing including home address(es) and/or home network prefix(es) >>>>> remain the same throughout the entire upper level session lifetime, >>>>> or that support for mobility functions is provided on the network side >>>>> in all conditions, unless these properties are specifically indicated >>>>> to the mobile node and its applications from the network. >>>>> >>>>> Is this trying to say "the network may not be able to provide a stable IP address to the MN"? >>>>> Even in the presence of a DMM solution? >>>> >>>> Yes.. it is imho a valid use case that the mn just does not care all addresses having mobility. The DMM solution may provide stable address only for a subset of addresses available for the mn. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mar 2014 - Submit 'The deployment models and scenarios' submitted to the IESG. >>>>> To be Informational RFC. >>>>> Marc 2014 - Submit 'Enhanced gateway and mobility anchor selection' submitted to the >>>>> IESG. To be Proposed Standard. >>>>> >>>>> I guess these are meant to be 2015. >>>> >>>> Uhh.. yes. (copy-paste is always dangerous) >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Btw, the milestones do not seem to have an item to cover for "Forwarding path and signalling management" >>>> >>>> Not at this point. Two reasons: I could not figure a good name for the milestone and also was a bit concerned whether we would have all the energy to work on this many documents in parallel. >>>> >>> >>> Jouni, that is the essential deliverable of the DMM WG, IMO. >> >> And how you would like to see that milestone to be formulated here? >> Give some text us to jump into.. >> >> Cheers, >> 2001:db8::4a:6f75:6e69 >> >> >>> >>> Alper >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> - Jouni >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Jouni >>>>> >>>>> Alper >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Take a look at the latest revision. I have added the initial stab >>>>>> for the milestones. Comments and flames are welcome. If you want >>>>>> something to be changed, just propose text & diff. You might also >>>>>> want to say why the change is needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter/blob/master/recharter_draft.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> - Jouni >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> dmm mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >