On Mar 12, 2014, at 5:11 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <[email protected]> wrote:
> Also, I propose to include the following text. Based on the discussions we > had in the NETEXT WG meet on last Friday, I assume Brian and the DMM chairs > agreed in principle agreed to allow any PMIPv6 maintenance related extensions > to be completed in DMM WG. Once the NETEXT closes, we will have a single > mobility working group and that will be DMM, just as we had MEXT in the past. This is/was my understanding as well. I would, however, emphasise the the word "maintenance". There is a difference between a new protocol work and maintaining a protocol. > "The DMM working group will also allow extensions to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 > protocol, specified in RFC 5213 and RFC 5844. These extensions are > maintenance-oriented and incremental in nature. Primarily to address any > protocol gaps required to support deployments and other standards > development organizations using the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol in their > system architectures." Looks as a good basis. Thx. - Jouni > > Regards > Sri > > > > > > > From: Alper Yegin <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 6:04 AM > To: Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DMM] DMM WG next steps > > Jouni, > > Thanks for the text. > > DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment > model, by distributing mobility functions more closer to the user. > > > This part excludes the approaches that place the mobility function on or near > the CN. > > I recommend the following revision: > > > DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment > model, by distributing mobility functions more closer to the user > and/or its corresponding nodes. > > Alper > > > > > > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> DMM WG has done some progress lately. The requirements document has >> already left the building and the gap analysis is heading to WGLC as >> we speak. It is about the time to think what we should do next now >> that we have grown out of the infancy. >> >> A smaller group of mobility enthusiasts have been discussing about >> possible next steps and how the possible new charter would look like. >> The current very draft text template can be found here: >> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter >> >> As you can see, we are still in early stages and all input it welcome. >> Obviously, possible re-chartering depends on many things. For example, >> things like getting the gap analysis out of the WG and what the IESG >> says. Nothing has been fixed or decided yet. Anyhow, we will start the >> discussion on re-chartering with the expectation that the DMM WG will >> re-charter and continue developing new solutions and/or enhancements >> in the IP mobility space. >> >> - Jouni & Dapeng >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dmm mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
