Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)
Hi Satoru, Please see zzh> below. Juniper Business Use Only From: Satoru Matsushima Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2023 2:26 AM To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Hi Jeffrey, thanks for the clarification. I understand you don't need a WG adoption for you to go to 3GPP. I agree with that. Zzh> While we don’t need a WG adoption to go to 3GPP, we do want it to be adopted by DMM as an informational draft – I explained the reasons in the earlier email. When it comes to liaison with 3GPP, IMO the contents from IETF/DMM to other SDO(s) should be an actual work in DMM. So I'm not clear whether we can input 3GPP your draft as it is outside of IETF work. Of course we can input any drafts which DMM WG can work on. Zzh> By “as it is outside of IETF work”, do you mean the DMM won’t adopt this draft, or do you mean that since the ANUP would need to be standardized in 3GPP not in IETF, hence we can’t input 3GPP the draft? Zzh> If it’s the latter that you mean, we can defer that discussion. Zzh> If it’s the former, I would to like to ask the chairs and the WG consider the value of adopting this work, which represents the consensus among many of us on a way to naturally evolve the mobile user plan, including the merits and many considerations of the proposal. Zzh> Thanks. Zzh> Jeffrey Best regards, --satoru On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 5:40 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang mailto:zzh...@juniper.net>> wrote: Hi Satoru, Please see zzh> below. Juniper Business Use Only From: dmm mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Satoru Matsushima Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 4:08 AM To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang mailto:40juniper@dmarc.ietf.org>> Cc: dmm@ietf.org<mailto:dmm@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Hi Jeffrey, Tianji, Your draft says: This document is not an attempt to do 3GPP work in IETF. Rather, it discusses potential integration of IETF/wireline and 3GPP/wireless technologies - first among parties who are familiar with both areas and friendly with IETF/wireline technologies. If the ideas in this document are deemed reasonable, feasible and desired among these parties, they can then be brought to 3GPP for further discussions. What I extracted from the above text is that you won't do any substantial standardization work in DMM/IETF about the contents described in your draft, since IETF is not a right venue for that. And you will go to 3GPP with your supporters. Zzh> Indeed. There is no standardization to be done in IETF. It is an informational document that discusses the proposal and many relevant aspects, which could be very valuable input to 3GPP. If it is correct, I'm not clear on what "WG adoption" means here. In case that this is an informational document composed by you, however no further substantial work could be expected, do we really need "WG adoption"? or do you need WG adoption to go 3GPP? If so, what is the reason behind it? Zzh> We don’t need WG adoption to go to 3GPP, but it is good to have an informational WG document (and eventually an informational RFC) for two purposes: Zzh> a) to document the (rough) consensus that this is a reasonable/natural user plane evolution. Zzh> b) to provide this to 3GPP as input when sought (more below). Let me share an experience between 3GPP in the past. A substantial uplane protocol work had been initiated in DMM, and then 3GPP (CT WG4) started a study for user plane protocol and a liaison between DMM was initiated by 3GPP. I think that way would be a case where we inform 3GPP one of our WG documents, but that itself would not be the goal for that work. Zzh> Similar approach will be taken. A 3GPP study will be initiated by 3GPP delegates who agree with this ANUP approach. They will point out the existence of the DMM informational document as input. Neither party needs to initiate an official liaison, but if 3GPP does, we can respond with this document. During the progress of our draft, we could also initiate a liaison to invite comments from 3GPP. Could you elaborate if we really need adoption, and what will you do in DMM after the adoption. Zzh> As explained above, we believe it is important and valuable to adopt this document: Zzh> a) The adoption process itself may trigger further discussions that will improve the proposal and the document. Zzh> b) It’s good to have an official draft to document the proposal and (rough) consensus among IETF/DMM, whether the proposal will be accepted in 3GPP or not. Zzh> c) The official document will be available as input to 3GPP if/when they do their study. Zzh> After adoptio
Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)
Hi Jeffrey, thanks for the clarification. I understand you don't need a WG adoption for you to go to 3GPP. I agree with that. When it comes to liaison with 3GPP, IMO the contents from IETF/DMM to other SDO(s) should be an actual work in DMM. So I'm not clear whether we can input 3GPP your draft as it is outside of IETF work. Of course we can input any drafts which DMM WG can work on. Best regards, --satoru On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 5:40 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang wrote: > Hi Satoru, > > > > Please see zzh> below. > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > *From:* dmm *On Behalf Of * Satoru Matsushima > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 12, 2023 4:08 AM > *To:* Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang > *Cc:* dmm@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: > draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) > > > > *[External Email. Be cautious of content]* > > > > Hi Jeffrey, Tianji, > > > > Your draft says: > > > >This document is not an attempt to do 3GPP work in IETF. Rather, it >discusses potential integration of IETF/wireline and 3GPP/wireless >technologies - first among parties who are familiar with both areas >and friendly with IETF/wireline technologies. If the ideas in this >document are deemed reasonable, feasible and desired among these >parties, they can then be brought to 3GPP for further discussions. > > > > What I extracted from the above text is that you won't do any > substantial standardization work in DMM/IETF about the contents described > in your draft, since IETF is not a right venue for that. And you will go > to 3GPP with your supporters. > > > > Zzh> Indeed. There is no standardization to be done in IETF. It is an > informational document that discusses the proposal and many relevant > aspects, which could be very valuable input to 3GPP. > > > > If it is correct, I'm not clear on what "WG adoption" means here. In case > that this is an informational document composed by you, however no further > substantial work could be expected, do we really need "WG adoption"? or do > you need WG adoption to go 3GPP? If so, what is the reason behind it? > > Zzh> We don’t need WG adoption to go to 3GPP, but it is good to have an > informational WG document (and eventually an informational RFC) for two > purposes: > > Zzh> a) to document the (rough) consensus that this is a > reasonable/natural user plane evolution. > > Zzh> b) to provide this to 3GPP as input when sought (more below). > > Let me share an experience between 3GPP in the past. A substantial uplane > protocol work had been initiated in DMM, and then 3GPP (CT WG4) started a > study for user plane protocol and a liaison between DMM was initiated by > 3GPP. I think that way would be a case where we inform 3GPP one of our WG > documents, but that itself would not be the goal for that work. > > Zzh> Similar approach will be taken. A 3GPP study will be initiated by > 3GPP delegates who agree with this ANUP approach. They will point out the > existence of the DMM informational document as input. Neither party needs > to initiate an official liaison, but if 3GPP does, we can respond with this > document. During the progress of our draft, we could also initiate a > liaison to invite comments from 3GPP. > > Could you elaborate if we really need adoption, and what will you do in > DMM after the adoption. > > Zzh> As explained above, we believe it is important and valuable to adopt > this document: > > Zzh> a) The adoption process itself may trigger further discussions that > will improve the proposal and the document. > > Zzh> b) It’s good to have an official draft to document the proposal and > (rough) consensus among IETF/DMM, whether the proposal will be accepted in > 3GPP or not. > > Zzh> c) The official document will be available as input to 3GPP if/when > they do their study. > > Zzh> After adoption we’ll continue to enhance the proposal and improve the > document (e.g. discuss and document more topics/issues that may be raised, > like what we did all along) until it is ready to become an informational > RFC. > > Zzh> Thanks! > > Zzh> Jeffrey > > --satoru > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 5:35 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang 40juniper@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Thanks, Tianji for presenting in IETF117 and requesting adoption in the > presentation and here. > > > > As a co-author, I obviously agree with what Tianji said here and want to > see it adopted. I am sure other co-authors share the same view even though > they did not explicitly echo “agree/support as co-
Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)
Hi Satoru, Please see zzh> below. Juniper Business Use Only From: dmm On Behalf Of Satoru Matsushima Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 4:08 AM To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang Cc: dmm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Hi Jeffrey, Tianji, Your draft says: This document is not an attempt to do 3GPP work in IETF. Rather, it discusses potential integration of IETF/wireline and 3GPP/wireless technologies - first among parties who are familiar with both areas and friendly with IETF/wireline technologies. If the ideas in this document are deemed reasonable, feasible and desired among these parties, they can then be brought to 3GPP for further discussions. What I extracted from the above text is that you won't do any substantial standardization work in DMM/IETF about the contents described in your draft, since IETF is not a right venue for that. And you will go to 3GPP with your supporters. Zzh> Indeed. There is no standardization to be done in IETF. It is an informational document that discusses the proposal and many relevant aspects, which could be very valuable input to 3GPP. If it is correct, I'm not clear on what "WG adoption" means here. In case that this is an informational document composed by you, however no further substantial work could be expected, do we really need "WG adoption"? or do you need WG adoption to go 3GPP? If so, what is the reason behind it? Zzh> We don’t need WG adoption to go to 3GPP, but it is good to have an informational WG document (and eventually an informational RFC) for two purposes: Zzh> a) to document the (rough) consensus that this is a reasonable/natural user plane evolution. Zzh> b) to provide this to 3GPP as input when sought (more below). Let me share an experience between 3GPP in the past. A substantial uplane protocol work had been initiated in DMM, and then 3GPP (CT WG4) started a study for user plane protocol and a liaison between DMM was initiated by 3GPP. I think that way would be a case where we inform 3GPP one of our WG documents, but that itself would not be the goal for that work. Zzh> Similar approach will be taken. A 3GPP study will be initiated by 3GPP delegates who agree with this ANUP approach. They will point out the existence of the DMM informational document as input. Neither party needs to initiate an official liaison, but if 3GPP does, we can respond with this document. During the progress of our draft, we could also initiate a liaison to invite comments from 3GPP. Could you elaborate if we really need adoption, and what will you do in DMM after the adoption. Zzh> As explained above, we believe it is important and valuable to adopt this document: Zzh> a) The adoption process itself may trigger further discussions that will improve the proposal and the document. Zzh> b) It’s good to have an official draft to document the proposal and (rough) consensus among IETF/DMM, whether the proposal will be accepted in 3GPP or not. Zzh> c) The official document will be available as input to 3GPP if/when they do their study. Zzh> After adoption we’ll continue to enhance the proposal and improve the document (e.g. discuss and document more topics/issues that may be raised, like what we did all along) until it is ready to become an informational RFC. Zzh> Thanks! Zzh> Jeffrey --satoru On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 5:35 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang mailto:40juniper@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote: Hi, Thanks, Tianji for presenting in IETF117 and requesting adoption in the presentation and here. As a co-author, I obviously agree with what Tianji said here and want to see it adopted. I am sure other co-authors share the same view even though they did not explicitly echo “agree/support as co-author” We appreciate that DMM provided a venue for us to discuss/present the topic/updates and gather input and supporters. We believe all the issues that were brought up have been sufficiently discussed and addressed in the draft, and we have not seen objections to the proposal, so it is appropriate to adopt this informational draft as a WG document. The adoption process, and work on the document by the WG after adoption will improve it further. Hopefully, people are coming back from their vacations and will speak up their thoughts. Thanks. Jeffrey Juniper Business Use Only From: dmm mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Tianji Jiang Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 6:16 PM To: dmm@ietf.org<mailto:dmm@ietf.org> Subject: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Dear DMM Team: During the IETF-117, we have presented and discussed our IETF draft: ‘Mobile User Plane Evolution’ (draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution: https://datat
Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)
Hi Jeffrey, Tianji, Your draft says: This document is not an attempt to do 3GPP work in IETF. Rather, it >discusses potential integration of IETF/wireline and 3GPP/wireless >technologies - first among parties who are familiar with both areas >and friendly with IETF/wireline technologies. If the ideas in this >document are deemed reasonable, feasible and desired among these >parties, they can then be brought to 3GPP for further discussions. What I extracted from the above text is that you won't do any substantial standardization work in DMM/IETF about the contents described in your draft, since IETF is not a right venue for that. And you will go to 3GPP with your supporters. If it is correct, I'm not clear on what "WG adoption" means here. In case that this is an informational document composed by you, however no further substantial work could be expected, do we really need "WG adoption"? or do you need WG adoption to go 3GPP? If so, what is the reason behind it? Let me share an experience between 3GPP in the past. A substantial uplane protocol work had been initiated in DMM, and then 3GPP (CT WG4) started a study for user plane protocol and a liaison between DMM was initiated by 3GPP. I think that way would be a case where we inform 3GPP one of our WG documents, but that itself would not be the goal for that work. Could you elaborate if we really need adoption, and what will you do in DMM after the adoption. --satoru On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 5:35 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang wrote: > Hi, > > > > Thanks, Tianji for presenting in IETF117 and requesting adoption in the > presentation and here. > > > > As a co-author, I obviously agree with what Tianji said here and want to > see it adopted. I am sure other co-authors share the same view even though > they did not explicitly echo “agree/support as co-author” > > > > We appreciate that DMM provided a venue for us to discuss/present the > topic/updates and gather input and supporters. We believe all the issues > that were brought up have been sufficiently discussed and addressed in the > draft, and we have not seen objections to the proposal, so it is > appropriate to adopt this informational draft as a WG document. The > adoption process, and work on the document by the WG after adoption will > improve it further. > > > > Hopefully, people are coming back from their vacations and will speak up > their thoughts. > > > > Thanks. > Jeffrey > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > *From:* dmm *On Behalf Of *Tianji Jiang > *Sent:* Monday, August 14, 2023 6:16 PM > *To:* dmm@ietf.org > *Subject:* [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: > draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) > > > > *[External Email. Be cautious of content]* > > > > Dear DMM Team: > > > > During the IETF-117, we have presented and discussed our IETF draft: > ‘Mobile User Plane Evolution’ (draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/ > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!EK_rpxFyiyc83DZJzh4RPbd0YkJPuxR3_9ox2_KhDo9ABaUZGfBEa9juMF9q91PN0_pEPjdFxcZCKY8JwZvouq1rNQ$> > ). In the presentation, we explained the fundamental ideas of the I.D., > along with our objectives. As we have stated, this was the 6th iteration > of the I.D. Including this time (of IETF-117), different versions of the > drafts have been presented & discussed thru the IETF-114, -115, -116 & > -117. > > > > At the moment, we believe we have covered sufficiently various aspects of > the MUP-evolution, i.e., the potential integration of gNB & UPF with > targeting at B5G & 6G. These are comprised of both IP-domain requirements & > wireless technologies. Further, as of now, > >- The 3GPP 4G LIPA work, i.e., the Local IP Access, bodes well for our >(B5G, 6G) ‘ANUP-like’ proposal. >- The 3GPP Rel-19 planning (5G) is on-going and some potential work >(of the I.D.) could be possibly brought it to 3GPP for further study >(Rel-19); and >- The 3GPP Rel-20 (6G roadmap) targets toward the beginning of Y-2025, >which is a perfect timing for exploration and adoption of the ANUP-like >work. > > > > Given all the work that have been done so far, we have, during the > IETF-117 DMM session, initiated a possible adoption-call of the I.D., in > the ‘informational’ track. We have emphasized our I.D. just serves as input > to 3GPP and we don’t intend to do 3GPP work in the IETF community. For a > procedural question from an on-site attendee of the DMM session, the > 3GPP-to-IETF liaison manager has shared his opinion and said ther
Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)
Hi, Thanks, Tianji for presenting in IETF117 and requesting adoption in the presentation and here. As a co-author, I obviously agree with what Tianji said here and want to see it adopted. I am sure other co-authors share the same view even though they did not explicitly echo “agree/support as co-author” We appreciate that DMM provided a venue for us to discuss/present the topic/updates and gather input and supporters. We believe all the issues that were brought up have been sufficiently discussed and addressed in the draft, and we have not seen objections to the proposal, so it is appropriate to adopt this informational draft as a WG document. The adoption process, and work on the document by the WG after adoption will improve it further. Hopefully, people are coming back from their vacations and will speak up their thoughts. Thanks. Jeffrey Juniper Business Use Only From: dmm On Behalf Of Tianji Jiang Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 6:16 PM To: dmm@ietf.org Subject: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Dear DMM Team: During the IETF-117, we have presented and discussed our IETF draft: ‘Mobile User Plane Evolution’ (draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!EK_rpxFyiyc83DZJzh4RPbd0YkJPuxR3_9ox2_KhDo9ABaUZGfBEa9juMF9q91PN0_pEPjdFxcZCKY8JwZvouq1rNQ$> ). In the presentation, we explained the fundamental ideas of the I.D., along with our objectives. As we have stated, this was the 6th iteration of the I.D. Including this time (of IETF-117), different versions of the drafts have been presented & discussed thru the IETF-114, -115, -116 & -117. At the moment, we believe we have covered sufficiently various aspects of the MUP-evolution, i.e., the potential integration of gNB & UPF with targeting at B5G & 6G. These are comprised of both IP-domain requirements & wireless technologies. Further, as of now, * The 3GPP 4G LIPA work, i.e., the Local IP Access, bodes well for our (B5G, 6G) ‘ANUP-like’ proposal. * The 3GPP Rel-19 planning (5G) is on-going and some potential work (of the I.D.) could be possibly brought it to 3GPP for further study (Rel-19); and * The 3GPP Rel-20 (6G roadmap) targets toward the beginning of Y-2025, which is a perfect timing for exploration and adoption of the ANUP-like work. Given all the work that have been done so far, we have, during the IETF-117 DMM session, initiated a possible adoption-call of the I.D., in the ‘informational’ track. We have emphasized our I.D. just serves as input to 3GPP and we don’t intend to do 3GPP work in the IETF community. For a procedural question from an on-site attendee of the DMM session, the 3GPP-to-IETF liaison manager has shared his opinion and said there is no problem to bring the ‘normal document’ to 3GPP for discussion/reference. At the end of the session, the DMM chair suggested we bring this draft to the email alias. So, we are here to officially initiate the adoption-call of our I.D. Team, please share your opinions, comments, questions, etc. Thank you. BR, -Tianji ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
[DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)
Dear DMM Team: During the IETF-117, we have presented and discussed our IETF draft: ‘Mobile User Plane Evolution’ (draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/ ). In the presentation, we explained the fundamental ideas of the I.D., along with our objectives. As we have stated, this was the 6th iteration of the I.D. Including this time (of IETF-117), different versions of the drafts have been presented & discussed thru the IETF-114, -115, -116 & -117. At the moment, we believe we have covered sufficiently various aspects of the MUP-evolution, i.e., the potential integration of gNB & UPF with targeting at B5G & 6G. These are comprised of both IP-domain requirements & wireless technologies. Further, as of now, The 3GPP 4G LIPA work, i.e., the Local IP Access, bodes well for our (B5G, 6G) ‘ANUP-like’ proposal. The 3GPP Rel-19 planning (5G) is on-going and some potential work (of the I.D.) could be possibly brought it to 3GPP for further study (Rel-19); and The 3GPP Rel-20 (6G roadmap) targets toward the beginning of Y-2025, which is a perfect timing for exploration and adoption of the ANUP-like work. Given all the work that have been done so far, we have, during the IETF-117 DMM session, initiated a possible adoption-call of the I.D., in the ‘informational’ track. We have emphasized our I.D. just serves as input to 3GPP and we don’t intend to do 3GPP work in the IETF community. For a procedural question from an on-site attendee of the DMM session, the 3GPP-to-IETF liaison manager has shared his opinion and said there is no problem to bring the ‘normal document’ to 3GPP for discussion/reference. At the end of the session, the DMM chair suggested we bring this draft to the email alias. So, we are here to officially initiate the adoption-call of our I.D. Team, please share your opinions, comments, questions, etc. Thank you. BR, -Tianji ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
