Re: rechartering

Hi Jouni,

I am OK with what you have if you think my concern is already
covered. BTW, I am no longer pushing forward with SEAL and am
interested in consideration for AERO:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-aerolink/

SEAL was trying to do too much to be all things to all people;
AERO is simple, and is really nothing more than IPv6 neighbor
discovery applied to tunnels.

Thanks - Fred
[email protected]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 5:11 PM
> To: Templin, Fred L; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DMM] rechartering
> 
> 
> Fred,
> 
> I think your concern (assuming you have SEAL et al in mind..) should
> already be convered by:
> 
>    [RFC6275, 5555], Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213, 5844] and NEMO [RFC3963].
>    However, mobility management in a limited area, such as within an
>    autonomous system, is not strictly limited to mentioned IP mobility
>    protocols but can be any existing or a new protocol solution enabling
>    the movement of a mobile node.
> 
> - Jouni
> 
> 5/27/2014 8:54 PM, Templin, Fred L kirjoitti:
> > Hi Jouni,
> >
> > I have one small edit to propose:
> >
> >        "However, mobility management in a limited area, such as within an
> >        autonomous system, is not strictly limited to mentioned IP mobility
> >        protocols but can be any existing or a new protocol solution enabling
> >        the movement of a mobile node. Specifically, when solutions are not
> >        based on IP mobility protocols, the DMM working group should cooperate
> >        with other IETF working groups working on other technologies that
> >        might allow the mobility of an end host. These working groups include
> >        but are not limited to I2rs, Lisp, Idr and Forces."
> >
> > Suggest changing the final two sentences to the following:
> >
> >        "Specifically, when solutions are not based on IP mobility protocols,
> >         the DMM working group should cooperate with other IETF working groups
> >         and/or consider non-working group items working on other technologies
> >         that might allow the mobility of an end host. These working groups
> >         include but are not limited to I2rs, Lisp, Idr and Forces, while
> >         non-working group items are considered based on their merit."
> >
> > Thanks - Fred
> > [email protected]
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jouni Korhonen
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:51 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [DMM] rechartering
> >>
> >>
> >> Now that the gap analysis I-D is almost on the stage of leaving the WG
> >> and the requirements I-D has almost completed IESG, it would be time to
> >> return to the rechartering topic.
> >>
> >> First, the latest revision can be found at:
> >> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter
> >>
> >> Second, have a look at it. There are few changes proposed by Alper eons
> >> ago and corrected milestones pointed by Behcet.
> >>
> >> Third, let us get this finally done..
> >>
> >> - Jouni
> >>
> >> 4/22/2014 3:55 PM, Jouni Korhonen kirjoitti:
> >>> Folks,
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for letting this topic to rot in a dark for the couple of last
> >>> weeks. I'll crank out a revision shortly..
> >>>
> >>> - Jouni & Dapeng
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> dmm mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm