Hi Carlos and Juan Carlos: Thank you for your new version. Just some quick comments
I have some concern when I read the sentence in section 3.1.2 (REQ2:
Transparency to Upper Layers when needed)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Mobile IPv6 RO The use of the route optimization support is
transparent to the upper layers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RO of MIPv6 means the mobile node should initiate a session with its
CN based on its CoA. So, if the mobile node change its point of
attachment, that session which is based on the CoA should re-establish. In
this case, we can not call it "be transparent to the upper layers". What
do you think?
And, in section 3.2.1 (REQ1: Distributed deployment)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Multihoming in PMIPv6 As summarized in the previous section a single
mobility session belongs to a single LMA (at the most the same
mobility session is shared across two access networks). As of
today there is no possibility to distribute anchors and to move
the session between different LMAs."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As written by the last sentence, do you mean within the scope of current
RFC mobility management solutions, there is no possibility to distribute
anchors and to move the session between different LMAs?
BR
Luowen
Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <[email protected]>
发件人: [email protected]
2012/10/24 02:34
请答复 给
[email protected]
收件人
[email protected]
抄送
主题
[DMM] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis-02.txt]
(re-sending, as Juan Carlos is having some issues posting to the list,
apologies if there are duplicates)
Hi all,
We have just submitted a new version of the Current Practices and DMM
Gap Analysis document.
We tried to address the multiple comments we received at the meeting and
on the mailing list.
We look forward to your new comments and reviews.
Best regards,
Juan-Carlos, Carlos, Telemaco and Charlie
--
Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/
GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA 4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67
-----来自 [email protected] 的消息，在 Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:56:31
-0700 -----
收件人:
[email protected]
主题:
I-D Action: draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis-02.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Mobility Practices and DMM Gap Analysis
Author(s) : Juan Carlos Zuniga
Carlos J. Bernardos
Telemaco Melia
Charles E. Perkins
Filename : draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis-02.txt
Pages : 23
Date : 2012-10-22
Abstract:
This document describes practices for the deployment of existing
mobility protocols in a distributed mobility management environment,
and identifies the limitations in the current practices with respect
to providing the expected functionality.
The practices description and gap analysis are performed for IP-based
mobility protocols, dividing them into two main solution families:
client- and network-based.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis
There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis-02
A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis-02
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
signature.asc
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
