Hi Fred, Thanks again for your responses.
Lets zoom into the following two points. On 9/11/14 4:07 PM, "Templin, Fred L" <fred.l.temp...@boeing.com> wrote: > >> >> >> 9.) Are you aware of implementation of a Aero client on iPhone ? Can >>Aero >> client be implemented in today's Apple iOS device, using standard API >> interface ? Will the Apple iOS allow an application to setup a tunnel >>and >> setup policy routes to steer a IP flow through that tunnel ? > >We have AERO Client implemented on linux in a lightweight >user-level daemon and have it on our TODO list to port to >Android. This is all user-level code and no kernel changes >required. We haven't really looked at Apple iOS yet. > >However, our target integration goal is OpenVPN since we will >then be able to use the same tool for AERO Client whether going >across a VPN or non-VPN connection. I haven't checked yet, but >if OpenVPN works on iOS, then AERO will also work on iOS when >we get this integration done. I understand, this can be realized in Android and in Linux based platforms. However, from what I understand, the Apple's published SDK does not allow applications to create IP tunnels and setup forwarding of IP packets through those tunnels. Essentially, we may not be able to build a Aero client for the currently deployed millions of iOS devices. Forget alone the tunnel part, the MIP community over the years realized that managing a client-eco system is not trivial. In the glory days of Microsoft window's rule, Microsoft they never integrated MIP stack in their windows operating system and the industry struggled to see the MIP client eco-system and eventually that forced us to look at network-based approaches. We invested in mobility models that did not require client support. All thought MIP flourished during the CDMA days, as Qualcom integrated the stack into the chipset, but however operators chose a network-based approach for 4G architectures. > >> >> >> 3.) Can the Aero solution support IP nodes that do not have Aero >>client >> >> stack ? >> > >> >Proxy AERO could be applied in the same manner as for PMIP, >> >but the document does not fully investigate that option at >> >this time. >> > Ok. So, the current experimental AERO RFC does not support network-based approaches and we cannot build client for a platform with most dominant market share. Based on these points #3 and #9, can we conclude that we cannot apply AERO for DMM ? If not, how do we apply and deploy Aero for DMM networks ? Regards Sri _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
