Re: offlisted mails - names of Work Teams

Sorr not the intention for surrendering anyone, just some thoughts.

Do you think Mobile IPv6 needs improved implementations?

Alex

Le 29/10/2014 18:15, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) a écrit :
> Alex - I give up :)
>
> Regards
> Sri
>
>
> On 10/29/14 10:12 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 29/10/2014 18:03, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) a écrit :
>>> Alex:
>>>
>>> The maintenance work does include mobile router based deployments; The
>>> work that we did in NETEXT, MEXT, MIP4 comes under that maintenance
>>> scope.
>>
>> But NETEXT, MEXT and MIP4 are all closed.  So where is the maintenance
>> happenning now?
>>
>>> We don't have to split the hair in analyzing what is in the charter
>>> text.
>>> If MIPv6 and PMIPv6 is included, why would NEMO be excluded ? Its the
>>> same
>>> protocol.
>>
>> First, PMIPv6 does not include neither NEMO nor Network Mobility, it
>> includes Prefix Delegation.  We discussed this extensively at the time
>> and that's what we concluded.
>>
>> NEMO (i.e. NEtwork MObility, check spelling) is an extension to Mobile
>> IPv6 and Mobile IPv4 to realize network mobility.  This comes with a
>> design requirement on the address architecture where one considers
>> Prefixes in addition to Addresses.
>>
>> One can tweak it in any way one wants, but still is that network
>> mobility is an additional extension to the MIP6 space - does DMM do the
>> same?
>>
>> Network mobility questions to each of the groups:
>>
>> Is Mobility Exposure happening in a Terminal about its own mobility?  Or
>> is it exposing the states of each other terminals attached to a Mobile
>> Router?  From the start or an afterthought?
>>
>> Forwarding Path and Signalling Management: are the route updates
>> concerning an address or a prefix?
>>
>> Enhanced Anchor is anchoring a prefix or an address?
>>
>>> Unless we work on some totally unrelated stuff, I don't see a reason as
>>> why a given extension will not be allowed. If the deployments need it
>>> and
>>> the WG agrees, we better do that work here; IETF cannot just pull the
>>> plug. General mobility and mobile networks related work is all in scope.
>>> At least that's how I interpret the text.
>>
>> Well, one particular maintenance aspect of Mobile IPv6 is the "never
>> delete tunnel" of a particular Mobile IPv6 implementation.  This is not
>> a new feature, not a new protocol, it is a bug.
>>
>> Should the bug be corrected?  Should implementations tweak around it?
>> Should the spec be updated?  Because currently it does not work.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sri
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/29/14 9:55 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 29/10/2014 17:42, Jouni a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My remarks to the Charter proposal got rejected in this respect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because NEMO was already part of the existing charter text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Charter currently does not say NEMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> The charter does mention mobile routers. That is nemo enough at least
>>>>> for me.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, no, sorry.
>>>>
>>>> Network mobility is a concept where groups of endnodes move together.
>>>> A
>>>> Mobile Router implementing Mobile IPv6 could be in charge of that
>>>> router, conceptually.
>>>>
>>>> In practical deployments, this MR ranges from a small pc to whole racks
>>>> of blades in charge of that mobility.  Using or not using Mobile IP at
>>>> all.
>>>>
>>>> Network mobility is involving more than Mobile Routers, and some times
>>>> no Mobile Routers at all.
>>>>
>>>>> Besides, the first revision of the charter text was put into git on
>>>>> Mar
>>>>> 5, 2014.
>>>>> You have had enough time to build more consensus to include "explicit
>>>>> NEMO
>>>>> wording" than the last minute when everybody is rather reserved to do
>>>>> any
>>>>> changes if just possible.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with you.  I am sorry for too late expression.
>>>>
>>>> I am as happy to know that Network mobility is _not_ considered by DMM
>>>> (where should it then?) than it _is_.
>>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jouni
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>