Conny, > I believe the reasons you have listed below are fine, but I was > wondering about the NetLMM work and whether that should fit into this > work as well given the fact that this protocol (PMIP) is based on > MIPv6 and there are a number of issues related to the interaction of > MIPv6 and PMIP being discussed right now? > > Is the reason for not merging the NetLMM WG with the others that it's > a network based mobility solution whereas the others are host-based?
That's a good question. It is true that Netlmm has a significant connection to Mobile IPv6. However, when we were thinking about this we came to the conclusion that the group is in a stage where it needs to work on its own to produce the main specification, and before that happens its hard to think about any form of re-organization. The activity level in the group is also extremely high, so at this point it seems to make more sense to keep this one separate. Jari _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
