The list is still missing draft-korhonen-dmm-local-prefix-01.
- Jouni
7/17/2014 10:45 PM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
On Jul 17, 2014, at 9:11 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote:
I'm in favor of this approach. This was my suggestion as well in the past
(when we presented prefix coloring spec) to move forward some documents.
But, those should be documents which are considered common across multiple
solution approaches.
Obviously. And that's the case in this particular instance.
Recapping the DMM solution space analysis below.
*Per-flow IP address configuration according to mobility needs*
Apps indicating their mobility needs to the IP stack on the MN, and
associated IP configuration signaling between the MN and the network.
draft-bhandari-dhc-class-based-prefix-03
draft-korhonen-dmm-prefix-properties-00.txt
draft-yegin-dmm-ondemand-mobility-02
*Mobility solution selection *
MN determining the type of mobility solution(s) it'd apply to a given flow.
draft-yegin-ip-mobility-orchestrator-00
*IP anchor selection*
MN selecting the IP anchor node after it decides to use IP anchoring
(whether in the access network or the core network).
draft-aliahmad-dmm-anchor-selection-00.txt
*Access network anchoring*
Anchoring IP address within the access network using IP-in-IP tunneling.
draft-bernardos-dmm-cmip-01
draft-bernardos-dmm-pmip-03
draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed-anchoring-04
draft-chan-dmm-enhanced-mobility-anchoring-00
draft-sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi-00.txt
draft-seite-dmm-dma-07.txt
draft-xuan-dmm-nemo-dmm-02.txt
*Corresponding node/network anchoring*
Anchoring IP address on the Corresponding Node or Corresponding Network.
Mobile IPv6 route optimization
draft-yegin-dmm-cnet-homing-02
draft-xiong-dmm-ip-reachability-01
*Host-route based intra-domain solutions*
Non-tunneling solutions.
draft-chan-dmm-enhanced-mobility-anchoring-00
draft-matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-02
draft-mccann-dmm-flatarch-00
Alper
The issue seems to be charter approval.
Sri
On 7/17/14 11:04 AM, "Alper Yegin" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Why? Why not make technical progress at every opportunity?
This extreme serialization and every step overly stretchingŠ. am I the
only one having issue with the slow progress?
Alper
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
