Hi Danny, This is my reply to all your mails. I hope it clarifies the air.
I read RFC 5014 and I think that on-demand mobility as I and it seems like as 3GPP understands is already there: IPV6_PREFER_SRC_HOME IPV6_PREFER_SRC_COA are all we need. So if UE wants mobility, it sets IPV6_PREFER_SRC_HOME and as a result gets the fixed IP address as you call it or it gets anchored mobility service. If UE does not want mobility, it sets IPV6_PREFER_SRC_COA then it gets the nomadic IP address. Note that in the case of mobility, UE may still get nomadic address and mobility, that is another issue. Therefore RFC 5014 is good enough, the authors, all good friends of this community have done a good job. Regards, Behcet On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:27 AM, Moses, Danny <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is in reply to comments we received from Behcet and Suresh regarding > the three types of addresses define in the draft. Suresh commented that the > ‘Fixed IP address’ is not necessary and application only require to select > Sustained or Nomadic IP addresses and Behcet commented that the ‘Sustained > IP address’ is not needed and not well define due to the fact that the draft > does not define how to identify the end of an IP session (will be discussed > in a separate email). > We have gave more thought to these types and concluded that the definitions > in the spec were confusing. We are providing new text in the new version, > hoping they are more clear. > We re-evaluated whether to stay with the definition of three IP address > types or move to a two IP address type scheme and eventually concluded that > it is better to stay with the three type alternative. We hope that the > better text in the new draft version will clarify and here are some > additional inputs: > Nomadic IP address (or in its new name: Non-persistent IP address): > Clearly this type is useful for all applications that do not require any IP > session continuity guarantee from the network and wish to avoid the overhead > introduced by the network as part of that guarantee (inefficient routes, > tunneling etc…). > Sustained IP address (or in its new name: Session-lasting IP address): > This is our accurate definition for the IP session continuity service that > some application require and is similar to what is provided today by > default, by mobile operators via GTP or PMIP. Basically, current > implementations provide a guarantee for the source IP address to be valid > throughout the time the mobile host is connected to the mobile network. > We concluded that mobile hosts do not really require such a guarantee. It is > sufficient to require a guarantee of the IP address availability while there > is/are an IP session(s) using this IP address and hence the more accurate > definition. Furthermore, some WG members have shown cases in DMM where it is > more efficient for applications to request a new Session-lasting IP address > when launched rather than using an existing one that was allocated to the > mobile host in the past. This is due to possible movement of the mobile host > to a LAN which is being served by a mobility anchor that is different from > the one that was used when the older Session-lasting IP address was assigned > to the mobile host. > Fixed IP address (no renaming …): > We believe that this is where our original text was the most unclear leading > to the confusion on the mailing list and the comments from the flour. A > Fixed IP address is guaranteed by the network to Always be valid, even if > the mobile host is not utilizing any IP sessions, or has been disconnected > from the network for some time. This is a special service that mobile > network operators provide for a premium charge, for servers, VPNs , secured > content and other applications. With this IP address type the network > operator provide IP address reachability in addition to IP session > continuity, and mobile hosts may register these addresses in DNS > infrastructure for name resolution. > Clearly, most mobile hosts do not require Fixed IP addresses and their > owners will not pay the premium cost for this service, but still, it is a > service that mobile operators provide and this is enough proof for us to > acknowledge its need. Please see some examples from > AT&T - > https://www.wireless.att.com/businesscenter/solutions/connectivity/ip-addressing.jsp, > Verizon - > http://www.verizonwireless.com/businessportals/support/features/data_services/static_ip.html > and Sprint - > https://www.sprint.com/business/solutions/sprint_enablers/sprint_datalink_and_static_ip/index.html#.VxC7xSN9480 > providing this service (which is called: Static IP address) > Regards, > Alper and Danny > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > A member of the Intel Corporation group of companies > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for > the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution > by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
