I split the gateway selection & re-anchoring.
Goals and Milestones:
aaa 2014 - Submit 'The deployment models and scenarios' as a working
group document. To be Informational RFC.
bbb 2014 - Submit 'Enhanced gateway and mobility anchor selection' as
a working group document. To be Proposed Standard.
ccc 2014 - Submit 'Gateway and mobility anchor re-selection' as a
working group document. To be Proposed Standard.
- JOuni
On Mar 18, 2014, at 5:07 PM, Alper Yegin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 4:20 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> Triggered by the question from Behcet, we should come up with the
>> milestones. Few proposals:
>>
>> o The deployment models and scenarios I-D is obvious.
>> o Anchor selection I-D is obvious. Could we also bundle
>> the re-anchoring solution into this one or should it be
>> a different I-D?
>
> I'd say re-anchoring is a separate I-D.
>
> Btw, I take "anchor selection" as the process/algorithm for selecting the
> type of anchor (e.g., one in access or core or corresponding network), and
> selecting a specific anchor node of that type (e.g., determining its IP
> address).
>
> If so, that can be an I-D.
>
> But then, how the data-path is setup and maintained between the MN and the
> anchor across handovers is another I-D.
> And in fact, that's where more than one solutions is likely…. So, limiting
> this as "one I-D" may not work.
>
>
>
>> o Mobility state exposing I-D. This would communication
>> between the end host and the network. Maybe also covering
>> the missing parts within the end host.. Are we OK with one
>> I-D or how people want to see this?
>> o ..
>>
>
> There's the API aspect on the terminal (one I-D),
> and there is the MN-network interface ones (e.g., extending RA, DHCP, etc.)
>
> Alper
>
>
>
>
>
>> - Jouni
>>
>>
>> On Mar 17, 2014, at 2:41 PM, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> I have updated the charter draft text slightly:
>>> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter/blob/master/recharter_draft.txt
>>>
>>> Basically:
>>>
>>> Added Sri's comment on PMIPv6 maintenance.
>>> Added Alper's comment of location of mobility functions.
>>> Added links to other IETF WGs on possible mobility enabling technologies.
>>> Added a comment that virtualised network functions are in scope.
>>>
>>> - Jouni
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
