Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"

[Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)]

Hi Arashmid,

I was not looking at their July date, but more about exchanging status of
the work and seek feedback.

I think, we now are on the same page now.

Sri




On 4/16/18, 8:37 AM, "Arashmid Akhavain" 
wrote:

>Thanks Kalyani,
>That makes sense. The wording of the action item though sounded like 3GPP
>was trying to impose a deadline.
>I just want to make sure that wasn't the case cause there is still a lot
>of work to be done.
>
>Arashmid
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Bogineni, Kalyani [mailto:kalyani.bogin...@verizonwireless.com]
>> Sent: 16 April 2018 11:26
>> To: Arashmid Akhavain ; Sri Gundavelli
>> (sgundave) ; dmm@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User
>> Plane Protocol in 5GC"
>> 
>> Arashmid - CT4 will start their study in July 2018. So work from IETF
>>can
>> provide input into that study.
>> Kalyani
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Arashmid Akhavain
>> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 11:21 AM
>> To: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) ; dmm@ietf.org
>> Subject: [E] Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item
>> on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
>> 
>> Hi Sri,
>> 
>> Thank you for clarification. I never suggested that IETF should single
>>out a
>> particular proposal. On the contrary, I believe DMM should simply
>>conduct
>> the study and provide 3GPP with all different options. 3GPP will decide
>>what
>> to do with the proposals from that point on. As you mentioned there
>>could
>> be several back and forth between the two SDOs.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So, while I agree with all points, I am still puzzled by the following
>>statement
>> in 3GPP email.
>> 
>> What is the significance of the July 2018 date?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ACTION:
>> 
>> CT4 respectfully asks IETF DMM to provide any information that may be
>> relevant to the above CT4
>> 
>> work by July 2018.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Arashmid
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > -Original Message-
>> 
>> > From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
>> 
>> > Sent: 13 April 2018 19:06
>> 
>> > To: Arashmid Akhavain ; dmm@ietf.org
>> 
>> > Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User
>> 
>> > Plane Protocol in 5GC"
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > Hi Arashmid,
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > I am not seeing a relation to the LS Response and the July 2018
>>deadline
>> that
>> 
>> > you are referring to. I think there is some disconnect here. Lets
>>review what
>> 
>> > we the chairs are thinking.
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > 1. The work in IETF related to User-Plane optimizations will continue
>>for
>> many
>> 
>> > months. When there is a LS Request, we will send a LS response. We
>>will use
>> 
>> > LS query/response as a means to gather feedback from the SDO
>>community,
>> 
>> > and provide an update on the status of all the documents in DMM at
>>this
>> 
>> > time. The status includes update on WG documents and individual I-D’s
>> under
>> 
>> > discussions.
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > 2. We are not going with the assumption that there will only be a
>>single LS
>> 
>> > request/response for this entire UP Study, but we will keep exchanging
>> 
>> > information based on the progress, and whenever we need additional
>> 
>> > clarifications.
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > 3. There are multiple proposals in IETF. As we have indicated in the
>>past, we
>> 
>> > are not going to recommend THE single solution and put it on a
>>platter for
>> 
>> > 3GPP consumption, but rather the focus will be on characterization of
>>each
>> 
>> > approach that we take up in DMM WG.
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > Now, keeping this in mind, if there is a good reason not to send the
>>LS
>> 
>> > Response now, delay it by some time, or if we believe there is
>>nothing to
>> 
>> > respond, we can discuss and decide to do just that. Hope this makes
>>sense.
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > Bottomline, all feedback is welcome!
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > Sri
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > On 4/13/18, 1:35 PM, "Arashmid Akhavain"
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > wrote:
>> 
>> >
>> 
>> > >Hi Sri,
>> 
>> > >Thank you for getting back to us. They listed a few dates there. The
>> 
>> > >final deadline is I guess July 2018.
>> 
>> > >Are we targeting anything earlier?
>> 
>> > >
>> 
>> > >Arashmid
>> 
>> > >
>> 
>> > >> -Original Message-
>> 
>> > >> From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
>> 
>> > >> Sent: 13 April 2018 12:47
>> 
>> > >> To: Arashmid Akhavain ;
>> dmm@ietf.org
>> 
>> > >> Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on
>> 
>> > >> User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
>> 
>> > >>
>> 
>> > >> Hi Arashmid,
>> 
>> > >>
>> 
>> > >> We provide the status of the related work items in DMM, and seek
>>any
>> 
>> > >>clarifications on their CT4 work. Key thing from our point of view
>>is
>> 

Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"

[Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)]

> I think that it would be nice if we can respond with the acknowledge to
>what the LS asked us. That could show that the work is progressing in our
>side already.

Ack! That’s what we were thinking too.

Sri






On 4/16/18, 6:41 AM, "Satoru Matsushima" 
wrote:

>I think that it would be nice if we can respond with the acknowledge to
>what the LS asked us. That could show that the work is progressing in our
>side already.
>
>As per the presentation of the UPPS SID and the LS in the last meeting in
>London, existing user plane protocol investigation we have now could be a
>content of the response.
>
>For example, I see that as following:
>
>1. TS29.281 still refers RFC2460 which doesn’t allow zero UDP checksum
>unlike IPv4/GTP-U case.
>
>2. While TS23.501 allows multihoming in single PDU session. It looks
>multipoint-to-point tunnel.
>   But TS29.281 still seems to keep GTP-U to be p2p tunnel.
>
>3. Unlike previous generation, TS23.501 allows multiple QFIs in a single
>PDU session. 
>   That means that just a single pair of endpoint addresses need to be
>handled to steer the data-path for the session in N3 and N9.
>
>Does anyone observe any other points?
>
>Best regards,
>--satoru
>
>
>> 2018/04/14 8:05、Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) のメール:
>> 
>> Hi Arashmid,
>> 
>> 
>> I am not seeing a relation to the LS Response and the July 2018 deadline
>> that you are referring to. I think there is some disconnect here. Lets
>> review what we the chairs are thinking.
>> 
>> 
>> 1. The work in IETF related to User-Plane optimizations will continue
>>for
>> many months. When there is a LS Request, we will send a LS response. We
>> will use LS query/response as a means to gather feedback from the SDO
>> community, and provide an update on the status of all the documents in
>>DMM
>> at this time. The status includes update on WG documents and individual
>> I-D’s under discussions.
>> 
>> 2. We are not going with the assumption that there will only be a single
>> LS request/response for this entire UP Study, but we will keep
>>exchanging
>> information based on the progress, and whenever we need additional
>> clarifications. 
>> 
>> 3. There are multiple proposals in IETF. As we have indicated in the
>>past,
>> we are not going to recommend THE single solution and put it on a
>>platter
>> for 3GPP consumption, but rather the focus will be on characterization
>>of
>> each approach that we take up in DMM WG.
>> 
>> Now, keeping this in mind, if there is a good reason not to send the LS
>> Response now, delay it by some time, or if we believe there is nothing
>>to
>> respond, we can discuss and decide to do just that. Hope this makes
>>sense.
>> 
>> Bottomline, all feedback is welcome!
>> 
>> 
>> Sri 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/13/18, 1:35 PM, "Arashmid Akhavain" 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Sri,
>>> Thank you for getting back to us. They listed a few dates there. The
>>> final deadline is I guess July 2018.
>>> Are we targeting anything earlier?
>>> 
>>> Arashmid 
>>> 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
 Sent: 13 April 2018 12:47
 To: Arashmid Akhavain ; dmm@ietf.org
 Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User
 Plane Protocol in 5GC"
 
 Hi Arashmid,
 
 We provide the status of the related work items in DMM, and seek any
 clarifications on their CT4 work. Key thing from our point of view is
 to get
 their feedback on the work we are doing and try to meet their
timelines.
 
 Sri
 
 
 On 4/12/18, 10:53 AM, "Arashmid Akhavain"
 
 wrote:
 
> Hi Sri,
> 
> Any idea what the plan is once we pass this information to CT4?
> 
> Arashmid
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli
>> (sgundave)
>> Sent: 12 April 2018 12:47
>> To: dmm@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item
>> on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
>> 
>> Please review and post your comments. Chairs will draft a response
>> for WG  review.
>> 
>> Sri
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/11/18, 11:16 AM, "Liaison Statement Management Tool"
>> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Title: CP-173160: New Study Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC
>>> Submission Date: 2018-04-11 URL of the IETF Web page:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1572/
>>> Please reply by 2018-07-20
>>> From: Satoru Matsushima 
>>> To: Sri Gundavelli ,Dapeng Liu
>>> 
>>> Cc: Dapeng Liu ,Terry Manderson
>>> ,Distributed Mobility Management
>>> Discussion List ,Sri 

Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"

[Arashmid Akhavain]

Thanks Kalyani,
That makes sense. The wording of the action item though sounded like 3GPP was 
trying to impose a deadline.
I just want to make sure that wasn't the case cause there is still a lot of 
work to be done.

Arashmid

> -Original Message-
> From: Bogineni, Kalyani [mailto:kalyani.bogin...@verizonwireless.com]
> Sent: 16 April 2018 11:26
> To: Arashmid Akhavain ; Sri Gundavelli
> (sgundave) ; dmm@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User
> Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> 
> Arashmid - CT4 will start their study in July 2018. So work from IETF can
> provide input into that study.
> Kalyani
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Arashmid Akhavain
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 11:21 AM
> To: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) ; dmm@ietf.org
> Subject: [E] Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item
> on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> 
> Hi Sri,
> 
> Thank you for clarification. I never suggested that IETF should single out a
> particular proposal. On the contrary, I believe DMM should simply conduct
> the study and provide 3GPP with all different options. 3GPP will decide what
> to do with the proposals from that point on. As you mentioned there could
> be several back and forth between the two SDOs.
> 
> 
> 
> So, while I agree with all points, I am still puzzled by the following 
> statement
> in 3GPP email.
> 
> What is the significance of the July 2018 date?
> 
> 
> 
> ACTION:
> 
> CT4 respectfully asks IETF DMM to provide any information that may be
> relevant to the above CT4
> 
> work by July 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> Arashmid
> 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> 
> > From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
> 
> > Sent: 13 April 2018 19:06
> 
> > To: Arashmid Akhavain ; dmm@ietf.org
> 
> > Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User
> 
> > Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> 
> >
> 
> > Hi Arashmid,
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > I am not seeing a relation to the LS Response and the July 2018 deadline
> that
> 
> > you are referring to. I think there is some disconnect here. Lets review 
> > what
> 
> > we the chairs are thinking.
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > 1. The work in IETF related to User-Plane optimizations will continue for
> many
> 
> > months. When there is a LS Request, we will send a LS response. We will use
> 
> > LS query/response as a means to gather feedback from the SDO community,
> 
> > and provide an update on the status of all the documents in DMM at this
> 
> > time. The status includes update on WG documents and individual I-D’s
> under
> 
> > discussions.
> 
> >
> 
> > 2. We are not going with the assumption that there will only be a single LS
> 
> > request/response for this entire UP Study, but we will keep exchanging
> 
> > information based on the progress, and whenever we need additional
> 
> > clarifications.
> 
> >
> 
> > 3. There are multiple proposals in IETF. As we have indicated in the past, 
> > we
> 
> > are not going to recommend THE single solution and put it on a platter for
> 
> > 3GPP consumption, but rather the focus will be on characterization of each
> 
> > approach that we take up in DMM WG.
> 
> >
> 
> > Now, keeping this in mind, if there is a good reason not to send the LS
> 
> > Response now, delay it by some time, or if we believe there is nothing to
> 
> > respond, we can discuss and decide to do just that. Hope this makes sense.
> 
> >
> 
> > Bottomline, all feedback is welcome!
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > Sri
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > On 4/13/18, 1:35 PM, "Arashmid Akhavain"
> 
> > 
> 
> > wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > >Hi Sri,
> 
> > >Thank you for getting back to us. They listed a few dates there. The
> 
> > >final deadline is I guess July 2018.
> 
> > >Are we targeting anything earlier?
> 
> > >
> 
> > >Arashmid
> 
> > >
> 
> > >> -Original Message-
> 
> > >> From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
> 
> > >> Sent: 13 April 2018 12:47
> 
> > >> To: Arashmid Akhavain ;
> dmm@ietf.org
> 
> > >> Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on
> 
> > >> User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> 
> > >>
> 
> > >> Hi Arashmid,
> 
> > >>
> 
> > >> We provide the status of the related work items in DMM, and seek any
> 
> > >>clarifications on their CT4 work. Key thing from our point of view is
> 
> > >>to get  their feedback on the work we are doing and try to meet their
> 
> > >>timelines.
> 
> > >>
> 
> > >> Sri
> 
> > >>
> 
> > >>
> 
> > >> On 4/12/18, 10:53 AM, "Arashmid Akhavain"
> 
> > >> 
> 
> > >> wrote:
> 
> > >>
> 
> > >> >Hi Sri,
> 
> > >> >
> 
> > >> >Any idea what the plan is once we pass this information to CT4?
> 
> > >> >
> 
> > >> >Arashmid
> 
> > >> >
> 
> > >> >> -Original Message-
> 
> > >> >> 

Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"

[Arashmid Akhavain]

Hi Sri,
Thank you for clarification. I never suggested that IETF should single out a 
particular proposal. On the contrary, I believe DMM should simply conduct the 
study and provide 3GPP with all different options. 3GPP will decide what to do 
with the proposals from that point on. As you mentioned there could be several 
back and forth between the two SDOs. 

So, while I agree with all points, I am still puzzled by the following 
statement in 3GPP email. 
What is the significance of the July 2018 date? 

ACTION:
CT4 respectfully asks IETF DMM to provide any information that may be relevant 
to the above CT4
work by July 2018.

Arashmid

> -Original Message-
> From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
> Sent: 13 April 2018 19:06
> To: Arashmid Akhavain ; dmm@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on User
> Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> 
> Hi Arashmid,
> 
> 
> I am not seeing a relation to the LS Response and the July 2018 deadline that
> you are referring to. I think there is some disconnect here. Lets review what
> we the chairs are thinking.
> 
> 
> 1. The work in IETF related to User-Plane optimizations will continue for many
> months. When there is a LS Request, we will send a LS response. We will use
> LS query/response as a means to gather feedback from the SDO community,
> and provide an update on the status of all the documents in DMM at this
> time. The status includes update on WG documents and individual I-D’s under
> discussions.
> 
> 2. We are not going with the assumption that there will only be a single LS
> request/response for this entire UP Study, but we will keep exchanging
> information based on the progress, and whenever we need additional
> clarifications.
> 
> 3. There are multiple proposals in IETF. As we have indicated in the past, we
> are not going to recommend THE single solution and put it on a platter for
> 3GPP consumption, but rather the focus will be on characterization of each
> approach that we take up in DMM WG.
> 
> Now, keeping this in mind, if there is a good reason not to send the LS
> Response now, delay it by some time, or if we believe there is nothing to
> respond, we can discuss and decide to do just that. Hope this makes sense.
> 
> Bottomline, all feedback is welcome!
> 
> 
> Sri
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/13/18, 1:35 PM, "Arashmid Akhavain"
> 
> wrote:
> 
> >Hi Sri,
> >Thank you for getting back to us. They listed a few dates there. The
> >final deadline is I guess July 2018.
> >Are we targeting anything earlier?
> >
> >Arashmid
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) [mailto:sgund...@cisco.com]
> >> Sent: 13 April 2018 12:47
> >> To: Arashmid Akhavain ; dmm@ietf.org
> >> Subject: Re: New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study Item on
> >> User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> >>
> >> Hi Arashmid,
> >>
> >> We provide the status of the related work items in DMM, and seek any
> >>clarifications on their CT4 work. Key thing from our point of view is
> >>to get  their feedback on the work we are doing and try to meet their
> >>timelines.
> >>
> >> Sri
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/12/18, 10:53 AM, "Arashmid Akhavain"
> >> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi Sri,
> >> >
> >> >Any idea what the plan is once we pass this information to CT4?
> >> >
> >> >Arashmid
> >> >
> >> >> -Original Message-
> >> >> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri
> >> >> Gundavelli
> >> >> (sgundave)
> >> >> Sent: 12 April 2018 12:47
> >> >> To: dmm@ietf.org
> >> >> Subject: Re: [DMM] New Liaison Statement, "CP-173160: New Study
> >> >> Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC"
> >> >>
> >> >> Please review and post your comments. Chairs will draft a response
> >> >>for WG  review.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sri
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 4/11/18, 11:16 AM, "Liaison Statement Management Tool"
> >> >> 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Title: CP-173160: New Study Item on User Plane Protocol in 5GC
> >> >> >Submission Date: 2018-04-11 URL of the IETF Web page:
> >> >> >https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1572/
> >> >> >Please reply by 2018-07-20
> >> >> >From: Satoru Matsushima 
> >> >> >To: Sri Gundavelli ,Dapeng Liu
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Cc: Dapeng Liu ,Terry Manderson
> >> >> >,Distributed Mobility Management
> >> >> >Discussion List ,Sri Gundavelli
> >> >> >,Suresh Krishnan 
> Response
> >> Contacts:
> >> >> >georg.mayer.hua...@gmx.com,3gppliai...@etsi.org
> >> >> >Technical Contacts:
> >> >> >Purpose: For action
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Body: 1. Overall Description:
> >> >> >3GPP working group of CT4 (Core and Terminal) would like to
> >> >> >inform the IETF that CT4 has initiated a study item on user plane
> >> >>