On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Templin, Fred L <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Behcet, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Behcet Sarikaya [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 12:51 PM >> To: Templin, Fred L >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [DMM] Going forward with the DMM work items >> >> The point is that the way the charter is being interpreted is >> we don't need solutions and we won't care if there are some, >> >> instead we will build the solution in five-six pieces from zero in DTs. > > Yeah, I guess that would be a shame. If people took the time to truly > understand > the AERO virtual link model and its applicability to Internet mobility I > don't think > there would be a rush to go off and do things in pieces. > > But, I am socializing ideas and at least some people seem to be actively > engaging > with me. So, I'm not sure where complaining would help further the process.
Again I think you are not getting the point. I am not sure if there is consensus on this interpretation? I also have concerns on the division of mobile state, anchoring, etc. in the charter. I think that reflects the thinking from the solution drafts we had in 2012. Now we are in 2014 and most of those solution drafts (including the one I had) are no longer being pursued and the thinking has considerably changed. There are solutions that are completely network based and require no mobility state tracking at the UE. Also in anchoring things have changed. So these are my concerns. Behcet _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
