> Actually no, because it is assumed that the prefix of B’ could be a SID
for End.GTP4.E instantiated in SRGW. But you’re correct the B’ doesn’t need
to be filled with arg.mob.session.
So the assumption here is that both T.M.GTP4.D and End.M.GTP4.E are
instantiated on the same SRGW.
If that's
Thanks Kentaro for you prompt review prior to my announce. :-)
> Thank you for updating the draft. Nice to see T.M.Tmap was renamed to
> T.M.GTP4.D corresponding to End.M.GTP4.E. :)
It helps to improve consistency of the draft, thanks.
> Some feedback about the updated description.
>
> > 6.6.
Gentle reminder. Please send your requests by 11th of July.
Sri
On 6/30/19, 10:02 AM, "dmm on behalf of Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)"
wrote:
>Folks:
>
>We are planning to have a f2f DMM WG meeting at IETF-105. It is currently
>scheduled for Wednesday, 24 July 2019, Morning Session I 1000-1200.
Hi,
Thank you for updating the draft. Nice to see T.M.Tmap was renamed to
T.M.GTP4.D corresponding to End.M.GTP4.E. :)
Some feedback about the updated description.
> 6.6. T.M.GTP4.D
> ...
> The prefix of B’ SHOULD be an End.M.GTP4.E SID with its format
> instantiated at an SR gateway with
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Distributed Mobility Management WG of the IETF.
Title : User Plane Protocol and Architectural Analysis on
3GPP 5G System
Authors : Shunsuke Homma
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Distributed Mobility Management WG of the IETF.
Title : Segment Routing IPv6 for Mobile User Plane
Authors : Satoru Matsushima
