I also received a bounce message, but the archives look correct: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmm/current/maillist.html
Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Haberman > Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:18 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DMM] Fwd: Re: Maintenance of Mobile IPv6 > > Charlie, > Actually, it did make it to the list. I suspect that someone on > the list had a MTA/MUA issue that caused a mail routing loop. That > routing loop was the basis for the bounce message to you. > > Brian > > On 10/29/14 11:05 PM, Charlie Perkins wrote: > > > > This email to the list bounced earlier today...! > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: Re: [DMM] Maintenance of Mobile IPv6 > > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:19:37 -0700 > > From: Charlie Perkins <[email protected]> > > To: Alexandru Petrescu <[email protected]> > > CC: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Hello Alex and all, > > > > Interesting discussion. Here's my take. > > > > On 10/29/2014 10:03 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > > > >> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> > >> - help with automated portal authentication in WLAN. Hopping on and > >> off from a WiFi hotspot to another, even without moving physically, > >> is often obstructed by web portal authentication requiring user > >> to type to fill forms; this is not only inconvenient, but in some > >> cases it is impossible, like with vehicular networks where the > >> driver is forbidden by law to type while behind the wheel. > > > > I would love to work on this. If you have ideas, please describe. > > > >> > >> > >> - bugs in an otherwise reliable Mobile IPv6 implementation of > >> a particular equipment manufacturer (HA never deletes a tunnel, > >> lifetime: remaining never): should the bugs be corrected or shoudl > >> the spec modified to reflect what the implementation actually > >> does? Should protocol workarounds be designed to deal with this > >> problem? > > > > My answers: (1) no, and (2) not within [dmm]. > > > >> > >> - future of the maintenance of the linux open source Mobile IPv6 > >> implementation: just for my clarification - is it still ok? Is there > >> some project behind it? Or is it dying? Currently the email list > >> seems silent, and the latest software releases date back to more than > >> one year. > > > > If [dmm] shows itself to be a credible force, the open source problems > > will naturally get the proper attention. But it shouldn't be on the > > [dmm] charter. > > > >> > >> - elimination, or reducing the effect, of the necessity of the 'focal > >> point' Home Agent: route optimization for the masses and for moving > >> networks as deployed in vehicles. > > > > Isn't this already on the radar for [dmm]? > > > >> > >> - Mobile IPv6 and IPv6 NAT Traversal; > >> > >> - IPv6 NAT in a moving network; > >> > >> - bypassing Mobile IPv6 implementation (and use IPv6 NATting) in cases > >> of particular applications, based on destination IPv6 address and > >> IPv6-only-when-reversed FQDN name. > >> > >> - the use of ULAs combined with Global addresses, with Mobile IPv6 > >> (e.g. ULA HoA but GUA CoA, or reverse). > > > > For these four items, it will depend on whether there is a constituency > > for action. > > > > > > And, one more thing: > > > > On 10/29/2014 10:46 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > >> Le 29/10/2014 18:40, Brian Haberman a écrit : > >>> > >>> > >>> On 10/29/14 1:33 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I agree yes. Are there enhancements that can be made to the Mobile > >>>> IPv6 > >>>> specs in particular RFC6275, RFC3963, RFC4877, RFC6276. > >>> > >>> I personally do not know. But as Jouni suggested, write a draft on the > >>> enhancements you want to see and get feedback. > >> > >> Brian - thank you for the invitation. Maybe I will do. > >> > >> Now that the deadline passed it's for the next year. I will keep a > >> mark on these emails. > > > > You don't have to wait! In fact you can submit a draft even on the > > first day of the IETF. > > > > For the four topics above, that would be very appropriate, I think. > > > > Regards, > > Charlie P. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dmm mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm > > > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
