I agree with Sri. However the aim is to have the WG to reference this draft as 
part of the response back to 3GPP.
Different contenders are welcomed to participate and provide analysis and 
comparsion.

Arashmid

From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 7:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: dmm <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [DMM] [E] Re: draft-bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane-00

Not sure I agree Behcet. Generally, the distributed mobility management charter 
does cover optimizations in user-plane and control plane. But, for now, lets 
not discuss if this is in scope for this WG, or not. Lets focus on technical 
discussions.

Sri


From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 3:43 AM
To: Sri Gundavelli <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "Bogineni, Kalyani" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
 Lyle Bertz <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, dmm 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [DMM] [E] Re: draft-bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane-00



On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>  [KB] I will let Sri answer this.

Nothing specific to MFA draft, but I will make a general comment.



If there is consensus to adopt draft-bogineni as a WG document, and if this 
work becomes part of the WG charter, I would think the document should include 
all IETF proposals under discussion for the given problem statement on 
user-pane optimization.

At this point, its an individual I-D and it is up to the authors on what to 
include, or what to exclude.


Right.

I think that 3GPP Study Item related drafts (there is also  Homma draft, all 
ILA, LISP etc ID-Loc drafts and 5G work) are better
stay as purpose specific individual drafts.

Otherwise including them to dmm charter, a rechartering of such a scale I 
believe should require a BoF.

My three cents :-)

Regards,
Behcet
Sri


From: dmm <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of 
"Bogineni, Kalyani" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 3:14 AM
To: Lyle Bertz <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, dmm 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [DMM] [E] Re: draft-bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane-00

Will MFA be proposed as an option
draft-gundavelli-dmm-mfa-00
[KB] I will let Sri answer this.



_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

Reply via email to