Revised PS2:
PS2: Divergence from other evolutionary trends in network
architectures such as distribution of content delivery.
Centralized mobility management can become non-optimal with a
flat network architecture.
H Anthony Chan
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Konstantinos Pentikousis
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 12:28 PM
To: jouni korhonen
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [DMM] comments on draft-ietf-dmm-requirements-02
Hi Jouni, all,
|Maybe we need to then say something about it like
| "Divergence from other evolutionary trends in network
| architectures such as distribution of content delivery" ?
Sounds good to me.
|No (without smile). But that is another trend to opposite direction
|and we should have a sufficient argument for our assertion here imho. What
|is so fundamentally resource consuming in "mobility context" handling
|that it requires distribution? Is it just a combination of all
|functions in one place (that has little to do with mobility per se)?
I think scalability here refers to the "hub-and-spoke" nature of the routing
fabric as introduced by a "centralized" mobility anchor. You may have valid
technical and/or operational reasons for adopting a hub-and-spoke model, that's
ok. But maybe others may want an alternative model which aims for different
optimalities, and for those the hub-and-spoke model is not, well, "scalable".
SDN, well the OpenFlow flavor of it anyway, is "logically centralized" wrt
network control, not how packets move around. SDN can do hub-and-spoke as well
as other routing fabrics. Information-centric networking, another major trend,
is definitely not pointing towards the merits of the current type of
centralization... So I think PS3 is valid.
|I would need to implement the "mobility stack" whatever support function
|anyway even if none of my application care about it.
If you are absolutely sure that none of your apps needs mobility support, and
none will ever need it in the future, then there's no reason to implement it,
sure. But if there's a chance one app may need it and 100 won't, then perhaps
you get to implement it. The difference is that, if you do implement that
"mobility stack", with conditional support you run that code for one app only
(and route the respective packets accordingly), while with today's approach you
do the same for 101 apps.
Best Regards,
Kostas
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
