Re: WGLC #2 for draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-04

Hello Jouni,

I communicated three issues:

- The gap does not explain the gaps between the requirements and
     FMIP / [seamoby] documents / [hokey]
- The document does not explain the relevance of the SIPTO example
     in fulfilling the requirements.  In fact, SIPTO has "limited mobility
     support".
- The document uses terminology "LMs" and "LMc" that could be
     improved.  Almost every existing IETF approach refers to some sort
     of "binding management", and it would be better to stay aligned
     with that.  This is especially true lately, since "location management"
     is relevant to advertisements and even surveillance.

Regards,
Charlie P.


On 6/2/2014 9:25 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
> Folks,
>
> The WGLC has ended for this I-D. There was one comment on the list:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmm/current/msg01152.html
>
> I also sent few editorial/typo correction comments offline to the 
> authors while doing my review for the proto write-up.
>
> We take the I-D passed the WGLC #2 but a new quick revision to
> include the two comments is needed before we ship the I-D out of the WG.
>
> - Jouni (as a DMM co-chair)
>
>
> 5/26/2014 6:39 AM, Jouni Korhonen kirjoitti:
>> Folks,
>>
>> This email starts a one week WGLC #2 for
>> draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-04. Issue you comments to the
>> mailing list and place possible tickets to the issue tracker. There are
>> quite a few changed mainly to tackle Charlie's comments.
>>
>> The WGLC ends 2ns June 2014 EOB (EEST). Silence is accounted as an
>> acceptance for the content.
>>
>> - Jouni (as a DMM co-chair)
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>