Hi, I have read and checked the updates in -03 version. And I support this draft to move forward, if the following is clearly resolved.
"4.2. IP Stack in the Mobile Host ... If the network infrastructure supports On-Demand Mobility feature, the IP stack may still request specific types of source IP address transparently to legacy applications." As this draft is based on the application-driven API selection idea, if no explicit request is given by an application, the type should be selected by default, though the default behavior could be regulated by the network operator. My comment is putting "based on a default havior" in a proper place in the sentence would be exact, leaving no misunderstanding as if the IP stack has the selection capability of source IP address type, instead of the application. One minor comment is [I-D.ietf-dmm-requirements] in the reference should be replaced by RFC7333. Regards, Seil Jeon -----Original Message----- From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jouni Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 2:16 AM To: [email protected] Cc: "刘大鹏(鹏成)" Subject: [DMM] WGLC #2 for draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-05 Folks, This email starts the WGLC #2 for draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-05. Post your comment to the mailing list and also add your issues/correction requests/concerns etc into the Issue Tracker. WGLC #2 Starts: 6/15/2016 WGLC #2 Ends: 6/29/2016 EOB PDT Regards, 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
