Re: regarding the re-chartering..
Behcet Sarikaya <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.nemo |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAC8QAcfYG=rCdKGq6sqVeqWMwQh6k3NhRA9kXJ7chmkywiKtBw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Brian Haberman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 7/24/14 6:01 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote: >> Hi Jouni, >> >> Regarding >> >> Distributed mobility management deployment models and scenarios: >> >> As I said in the session today I am having trouble understanding the >> deployment models. >> >> To me it sounds like doing the last thing first, i.e. after we get the >> dmm solution we work on how to deploy it (of course if the deployment >> has not already been considered by the solution). > > I may be interpreting the charter incorrectly, but I think there may be > a disconnect. I interpreted the the charter text as describing > deployment models like: > > - Wi-Fi-based mobility management > > - Cellular (e.g., 3GPP) mobility management > > - Mixed technology mobility management > > - etc. > > If that above interpretation is what was intended, I think it makes > sense to have that type of description available to guide solution > development. > > If the above is not correct, then I suspect the charter needs some > clarification. > If that is the case then I suggest calling it DMM usage scenarios or use cases in real networks? Use case work is done before solution work, so that I think is a good match with DMM. Regards, Behcet > Regards, > Brian > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >