Hi Xinpeng, thanks a lot for the review. Please see inline below.
On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 03:59 +0000, Weixinpeng (Jackie) wrote: > Hi Carlos, > Thanks for the improvement of the document, I think the document is > well structured and provide a good solution for distributed mobility > management. > The following are some of my comments: > 1. Page7. "...MAAR1 definitely stores the temporal BCE previously > allocated and unicasts a Router Advertisement (RA) to the MN > including the prefix reserved before..."，The prefix allocation > to MN is restricted to RA mechanism, but there would be alternative > methods, for instance in 4G, network can send prefix information > through 3GPP-specific signaling. So i think it's better to > consider whether restricted to RA or not. OK, we'll look into it in -02. > 2. As MN moves across MAARs there could be many P-MAAR exist, It's > better to give a brief description of how to cope with it. OK. We'll add some text about that. > 3. The solution doesn't differentiate different session continuity > requirement, so how the solution coexist with the on-demand solution, > or you want to promote a solution independent from the on-demand one? The solution is compatible with on-demand, meaning that it can be used only for those sessions that demand session continuity. We leave the details on how to do this out-of-the-scope, but we can add some text. > 4. Page13. There is no reference for "HSS", I suggest add a reference > for it, or just remove it. We use it as one example of control plane anchor. We will expand the acronym in -02. > 5. Page15. " ...sent over those logical interfaces playing the role > of anchoring MAARs (different from the serving one) include a zero > prefix lifetime... " Two lifetime related fields is included in RA > message, Vaild Lifetime and Preferred Lifetime, I think the lifetime > you mentioned is Preferred Lifetime. Maybe how to set the value of > Valid Lifetime should be described. Thanks, we will clarify in -02. We actually refer to the Valid Lifetime, so the address is deprecated. Thanks! Carlos > > Regards, > -Xinpeng (Jackie) > > -----Original Message----- > From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carlos Jesús > Bernardos Cano > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 6:18 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [DMM] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif- > 01.txt] > > Hi, > > We have submitted a revised version of our draft addressing the > comments we got in Singapore: > > - Added some statements about which model from draft-ietf-dmm- > deployment-models our solution follows (addressing a comment received > from Sri). > - Added some text relating to draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility > (addressing a comment received from Danny). > > Additionally, we added some terminology from draft-ietf-dmm- > deployment- models and other minor changes. > > In Singapore we got quite good support of the document. I'd like to > request feedback/reviews from the WG. > > Thanks! > > Carlos _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
