Probably not. Its not updating RFC4283. Its defining new type values and certainly it can be done in a separate document.
May be Chairs have a better view. Sri From: Hui Deng <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 7:09 PM To: Sri Gundavelli <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [DMM] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-00.txt thanks for your explaination, wouldn't that be RFC 4283bis? -Hui 2014-10-18 12:55 GMT+08:00 Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: Hi Hui, May be this is for Charlie and also Vijay from the ancient history. But, let me try. The work in MIF is more about defining network/PVD identity. In one sense its similar to the PLMN ID construct. Where as the MN-Id extensions draft is more about generating MN-Identity based on other protocol identifiers and other physical device identifiers. We already have IMSI-based identifier, which is the IMSI-NAI; We needed similar identifier based on MAC address for Wi-Fi, and also others identifiers based on some other sources. So, this is more about extending the base 4283 work with new types. Regards Sri
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
