> -----Message d'origine----- > De : jouni korhonen [mailto:[email protected]] > Envoyé : lundi 19 mars 2012 11:59 > À : SEITE Pierrick RD-RESA-REN > Cc : [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Objet : Re: [DMM] New DMM draft:draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed- > anchoring-00.txt > > > Pierrick, > > On Mar 19, 2012, at 12:16 PM, <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I think it is worth to work on solution providing more information on > the type of address. IMHO, it is a requirement for the UE to play with > more than one IP address and select the more appropriate source address > according the topological anchor point. DMM is clearly one use-case > but, this feature is also required for offload purpose in current > centralized network based mobility. The ongoing proposals for RA > extensions, that allow to distinguish anchored from local prefix, are > interesting. Now, the UE shall have the intelligence to make the source > address selection according to prefix > > To me offloading and DMM go hand in hand, since how the current charter > is described emphasizes the use of CoAs (could be the "local prefix"). > With some care, solutions developed in DMM space apply to both. At > least this is what I want to see to happen. >
I couldn't agree more. Pierrick > > properties; at least extensions to RFC3484 may be defined but more > sophisticated selection behavior may be required, typically, policies > based selection, e.g. offload policies. > > For example, draft-korhonen-dmm-prefix-properties discuss briefly how > to hook into RFC3484bis (and even to RFC3484). The text superseding > source address selection Rule 8: > > Rule 8 may be superseded if the implementation has other means of > choosing among source addresses. For example, if the implementation > somehow knows which source address will result in the "best" > communications performance. > > is especially a good fit here. > > - Jouni > > > > > Pierrick > > > >> -----Message d'origine----- > >> De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la part > de > >> jouni korhonen > >> Envoyé : dimanche 18 mars 2012 21:47 > >> À : Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano; Marco Liebsch > >> Cc : [email protected] > >> Objet : Re: [DMM] New DMM draft:draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed- > >> anchoring-00.txt > >> > >> > >>>> > >>>> So you think that the UE should receive multiple IP addresses and > >> treat them > >>>> differently according to the associated topological anchor point? > >> Hmm, yes, possible. > >>>> What about real time streaming and other IP data sessions, which > >> could have a > >>>> longer lifetime, they should be anchored than at a central point > as > >> well, right? > >>>> If the MN had such intelligence and information, it could treat > the > >> HNPs differently, true. > >>> > >>> I think thank kind of approaches make sense. > >> > >> There are a couple proposals on table that go into this direction. > We > >> put those > >> under "addressing enhancements" slot. Basically piggybacking > anchoring > >> properties > >> of a prefix along with address configuration. > >> > >> - Jouni > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Carlos > >>> > >>>> > >>>> marco > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> dmm mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
