Re: offlisted mails - names of Work Teams

Hi Alex,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 9:47 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DMM] offlisted mails - names of Work Teams
> 
> Le 24/10/2014 18:17, Brian Haberman a écrit :
> > Alex (and others),
> >
> > On 10/24/14 11:00 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> >> But under no circumstances should they become unaccountable with
> >> respect to the WG at large.
> >
> > Please (re-)read what I posted about these teams a little while ago.
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmm/current/msg01627.html
> 
> Thank you for the pointer, I've read and re-read it at the time.
> 
> It increased my confidence to re-think again the same thing: we dont
> know whether these are Design Teams RFC2418, or something else.
> 
> I dont know what to expect as output.
> 
> I dont know what does this mean to the future of Mobile IP?
> 
> Are the 3 teams going to produce a competitor to Mobile IP?  Is Mobile
> IP becoming Historic?
> 
> Is Mobile IP Network Mobility taken into account in these teams?
> 
> Is Network Mobility considered from the start, or as an afterthought
> (like NEMO after Mobile IP, PrefixDelegationPMIP after PMIP)?
> 
> Are the earlier RFCs considered?
> 
> My remarks to the Charter proposal got rejected in this respect.

Based on what I can tell, these three focused areas are still calling for an
IP mobility protocol. It could be based on MIP/PMIP, or on some new
protocol like AERO.

Thanks - Fred
[email protected]

> Alex
> 
> >
> > Regards,
> > Brian
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dmm mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm