On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> wrote: > > As Sri pointed out DMM is OK to work on "maintenance-oriented extensions of > the Mobile IPv6 protocol family". So this is likely the venue within IETF. > Mobile IPv4 as such has no place here. >
Why not ISE? For both MIPv6 and MIPv4. Of course you may not be able modify existing RFCs but just write it as a new draft and do not bother dmm where future protocol work is supposed to be done. Behcet > - Jouni > > > 1/8/2016, 6:50 AM, Thierry Ernst kirjoitti: >> >> >> Hi Alex, all, >> >> My understanding of what Jouni wrote is that it’s fine to work on MIP6 >> improvement, but the MIP4 can live its life as is, to which I totally agree. >> And I also agree with Alex that we need to fix bugs in MIP6 (and the related >> suite, in particular NEMO) and progress them in the standard track. It has >> been too long since we last work on those and now it is certainly right to >> do it. >> >> So, the question is if DMM is the right place or not to do the work, if >> not I would like to hear about alternatives within the IETF. >> >> Regards, >> Thierry. >> >> >> >>> Le 8 janv. 2016 à 13:54, Alexandre Petrescu >>> <[email protected]> a écrit : >>> >>> >>> >>> Le 22/12/2015 04:56, Jouni a écrit : >>>> >>>> >>>> Behcet, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your constructive comments. I believe academic >>>> conferences/journals are not appropriate venues for PMIPv6/MIPv6 >>>> maintenance since these protocol families are already past their >>>> prime time as “hot research topics". Looking at the existing charter >>>> I cannot find too much love towards anything IPv4 so I think we can >>>> let MIPv4 finally rest in peace. >>> >>> >>> Jouni I can agree with you in general. >>> >>> But let me suggest that MIPv4 and MIPv6 are two implementations very >>> important in some places including where I work. >>> >>> They are no longer 'hot' as you say, but there are certainly protocol and >>> implementation bugs which need correction. Actually some of the corrections >>> have already been applied but are not reflected in RFCs. >>> >>> Sometimes there is a feeling of frustration if implementations thrive >>> where WG cares little. >>> >>> <provocative> a widespread implementation of MIP6 is still bugged and >>> does not respect the MIPv6 RFC - do you want that discussed >>> publicly?</provocative>. >>> >>> Alex >>> >>>> >>>> - Jouni >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 21 Dec 2015, at 09:46, Behcet Sarikaya <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Jouni, all, >>>>> >>>>> Let me ask what is the point in maintaining the protocols that no >>>>> one uses? For academic purposes? If yes, then they should find >>>>> their places in the conferences or journals. >>>>> >>>>> Now, mip4 WG has been closed. So is dmm going to maintain mip4 as >>>>> well? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Behcet >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Jouni, all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Although I'm already late, I just wanted to express my >>>>>> post-adoption call to the three drafts. >>>>>> >>>>>> Carlos >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 08:32 -0800, Jouni Korhonen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Folks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The WG adoption call for all three I-Ds have completed: >>>>>>> draft-gundavelli-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-00 >>>>>>> draft-yan-dmm-hnprenum-03 draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The adoption for the first two was unanimous. The last >>>>>>> (draft-seita- *) received few concerns but the number of >>>>>>> supporters was enough to convince the chairs there is enough >>>>>>> interest and support to work on it. The chairs encourage the >>>>>>> authors of draft-seite-* to pay close attention and work out >>>>>>> the concerns raised during the adoption call. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For the I-D authors. Please, submit draft-ietf-*-00 versions of >>>>>>> the documents as soon as possible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Jouni & Dapeng >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ dmm mailing >>>>>>> list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list >>>> [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dmm mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dmm mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm >> > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
