Re: 回复： 回复： Call for adopti on: draft-yegin-dmm-ondemand-mobility-03

Le 17/04/2015 09:50, Alper Yegin a écrit :
> Hi Dapeng,
>
>>>
>>>> [as an individual contributor]
>>>>
>>>> I support the idea of “Exposing mobility state to mobile nodes and
>>>> network nodes” as described in our charter.
>>>>
>>>> For this particular draft, after some offline discussion with the
>>>> authors, I still have the following comments/suggestions:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Definition and distinction of "Fixed IP” and “Sustained IP”
>>>> should be clear, more clarification text would be helpful.
>>>
>>> After rounds of online and offline discussions, I'm still not clear
>>> where the issue is.
>>> Could you please explain what exactly is this issue with the current
>>> definitions?
>> Some information is not obvious from the draft text. More explanatory
>> text will at least help the application developer to know whether this
>> is useful for them.
>
>> For example, as you said, HoA can either be “fixed IP” or “sustained
>> IP”, then when HoA become "fixed IP" and when it becomes "sustained IP"?
>
> When a HoA is called "fixed" vs "sustained" is already provided by the
> respective definitions in the I-D:
>
> - Fixed IP Address
>
>     This is what standard Mobile IP provides with a Home Address (HoA).

But fixed IP addresses are also provided locally as link-local addresses 
not only by MIP, so that could be integrated as such.

Fixed IP addresses are also provided by VPN and DHCP.

So maybe we could say that a "Fixed Global IP Address is provided by 
MIP, VPN and DHCP".

Alex

>     The mobile host is configures a HoA from a centrally-located Home
>     Network.  Both IP session continuity and IP address reachability are
>     provided to the mobile host with the help of a router in the Home
>     Network (Home Agent, HA).  This router acts as an anchor for the IP
>     address of the mobile host.
>
>     - Sustained IP Address
>
>     This type of IP address provides IP session continuity but not IP
>     address reachability.  It is achieved by ensuring that the IP address
>     used at the beginning of the session remains usable despite the
>     movement of the mobile host.  The IP address may change after the
>     termination of the IP session(s), therefore it does not exhibit
>     persistence.
>
>     A sustained IP address may be configured and maintained by using
>     access network anchoring, corresponding network anchoring, or some
>     other solution.
>
>
> If these definitions are not clear, please recommend improvement.
>
> If you are asking about "how the IP stack on the mobile node" configures
> such IP addresses, as you know this is not in the scope of this API
> document, but that'll be addressed by the protocol solutions in DMM.
>
> If you are asking about something else, please clarify that too. I tried
> to answer your question based on my understanding of what it might be.
>
>> Another example/question: Is there any “fixed IP” that does not belong
>> to the type of HoA?
>>
>
> What do you mean?
>
>
>>
>> In section 3.1:
>> “The mobile host is configures a HoA from a centrally-located Home..”,
>>  do you mean “The mobile host is configured a HoA from a
>> centrally-located Home..”?
>>
>
> Yes, it's a typo. (is configured with, or configures).
>
>
>> In section 3.1:
>> “Applications running as servers at a published IP address require
>> aFixed IP Address.”..
>> Is there any real-life example for this requirement?
>
> This is by definition, right?
> If you are running a server, you need need to publish its IP address (in
> DNS, for example).
> And you want that address to be "fixed" (i.e., not changing). And that's
> what we call "Fixed IP address" in this I-D.
>
> Please see the below links for real-life examples of how operators are
> already marketing such things:
>
> https://www.wireless.att.com/businesscenter/popups/general/custom-ip-addressing.jsp
>
> http://www.verizonwireless.com/businessportals/support/faqs/DataServices/faq_static_ip.html
>
>
>
>
>> Most server only need static public IP address instead of “fixed IP
>> address” (providing mobility) ?
>>
>
>
> Please see the examples on the links above.
>
>
>> In section 3.1:
>> “Enterprise applications that connect to an enterprise network via
>> virtual LAN require a Fixed IP Address.” can you explain the reason?
>>
>
> This is about Enterprise APN.
> Or, for example, what AT&T refers to as "customer-provided IP
> addresses". See the above link, and the below text:
>
> *Customer-provided IP addresses:* If you decide to provide your own IP
> address block for your mobile data configuration, you will essentially
> extend your company's wide area network to include the AT&T cellular
> network. This allows for simpler firewall configuration, as well as
> mobile device identification.
>
>
>>
>>> So that we can understand the residual unclarity in your mind, and we
>>> let other people also weigh in on the matter.
>>>
>>>> 2. Since we are trying to define API, opinion from application
>>>> developers or OS vendors would be helpful. We can invite some of
>>>> those experts to join the discussion.
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>>> 3. Agree with Jouni’s opinion regarding the IPR, the group need to
>>>> evaluate it.
>>>
>>> I really don't understand what exact "IPR evaluation" process you are
>>> referring to.
>>> I'm not familiar with such a thing in IETF.
>> [quote from Jouni’s mail]
>> “we need to evaluate what parts are covered by the declared IPR and
>> whether the WG agrees to keep those in the solution”..
>>
>
> Yeah, I know. I also told Jouni that I don't know what exact process
> he's referring to.
> Anyways, if any of the chairs are referring to some IETF process, I'd
> like to know what that is.
>
> I'm not familiar with it. If there's such a thing, we need to make sure
> it's an official IETF process, and it'll be applied to all docs across
> the DMM, and already being applied across the IETF.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alper
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Dapeng
>>>
>>> Alper
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dapeng Liu
>>>>
>>>> 在 2015年4月4日 星期六，上午8:03，Jouni Korhonen 写道：
>>>>
>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> This email starts a two week adoption call for the I-D
>>>>> draft-yegin-dmm-ondemand-mobility-03
>>>>> to confirm its adoption as a DMM WG document and as a basis for the
>>>>> technical solution. The call ends April 17th EOB PDT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Express your support or opposition to the mailing list. During the
>>>>> IETF92 meeting we got 10 voices for the adoption and 3 against. we
>>>>> expect at least the same amount of expressed opinions on the list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Notice that version -01 of this I-D had an IPR declared to it. See
>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2309/
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>


_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm