Alper, Thanks for the proposed text. I am not entirely sure about the addition of the client mobility. It was not discussed during the meeting when we were advised to add the maintenance part.
What do the others think? - Jouni On Apr 4, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Alper Yegin wrote: > Jouni, > > One more thing: > > The DMM working group will also work on maintenance-oriented and > incremental extensions to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol, specified > in RFC 5213 and RFC 5844. The Proxy Mobile IPv6 work primarily > addresses any protocol gaps required to support existing deployments > and other standards development organizations using the Proxy Mobile > IPv6 protocol in their system architectures. > > We shall not shut the door on the client-based mobility. > Hence, I propose the following revision: > > > The DMM working group will also work on maintenance-oriented and > incremental extensions to the Mobile IPv6 protocol, specified > in RFC 5213, RFC 5844, and RFC 3775. > > > I removed the last sentence because I wasn't sure if it really added any > value. > > Alper > > > > > > > On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> Take a look at the latest revision. I have added the initial stab >> for the milestones. Comments and flames are welcome. If you want >> something to be changed, just propose text & diff. You might also >> want to say why the change is needed. >> >> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter/blob/master/recharter_draft.txt >> >> - 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
