Dirk,
It is not difficult to extend FPC for BNG as most of the rules are similar in
structure. My team built an FPC agent and we are now building Sx (3GPP CUPS
PFCP) but it is at best a subset of FPC and has some holes. I am unsure I
would materially update FPC based on what I have learned
FYI - This is a YANG fix for default config statements to be consistent with
NMDA statements made in the Appendix.
Apologies for the submission spam. Please look at the version 11 diff for
substantive updates.
Lyle
> -Original Message-
> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Beha
All,
The following changes have been made since version 10 as noted during IETF
101:
Service-Endpoints eliminated. Service-Group and DPN interfaces
changed to hold information previously held by Service-Endpoint as
noted in *ML* during IETF 101.
Scrubbed YANG for NMD
Topic Name: FPC version 11
Presenter Name: Lyle Bertz
Time: 20 minutes
Draft Reference: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp/
> -Original Message-
> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli
> (sgundave)
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2018
All,
I would like to express my support of getting this particular work out as
standard.
As we are implementing networks that support IoT (be it 4G IoT or 5G), new
Mobile Node Types identified in the specification are appearing in more than
just device configurations, i.e. we see these identif
Sri:
Please add the following if Charlie has not already requested.
Topic Name: FPC update
Time: 30 minutes
Draft Reference: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp.txt
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
Sen
Due to schedules, the daily meetings for FPC are cancelled for this Thursday
and Friday.
Lyle
-Original Appointment-
From: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 12:54 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]; Charlie Perkins; Satoru Matsushima; Marco Liebsch; Sri
Gundavelli (sgundave
Due to scheduling conflicts we are cancelling today and tomorrow's calls. See
y'all on Friday.
Lyle
This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole
use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the
inten
is all about Section 4 (except the last item) but the
implication is a streamlined protocol model
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: Satoru Matsushima [mailto:satoru.matsush...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 9:25 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] FP
All,
I sent out invites for FPC meetings for 1 hour daily at 9 am CST a few weeks
ago. We are cancelling tomorrow's meeting so that we can focus on document
updates.
Thanks!
Lyle
This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0600
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN="Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]":MAILTO:lyle.t.be...@sprint.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-A
All,
For tomorrow we'll start the work on Policy.
Concepts.
Policy structure (Policy, Rule, Descriptor and Action) definitions are
templates. They may be complete or require further complementary information,
referred to as Settings, to complete them. Indexed (given a key) structures
are r
Good progress.
1. Validated entity model can support DDDS selection (3GPP, IETF)
2. 2 proposals enclosed with updates per todays' discussion & a few open
questions.
Tomorrow is open questions and starting policy.
Lyle
This e-mail may contain Spri
Comments inline
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 12:20 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] ; dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] FPC - Topology
Hello Lyle,
I have comments on the slides, and could benefit from larger discussion on the
mailing
All,
I've put together a quick assessment on Topology (proposed for new draft and
v09).
We'll briefly review it today as time permits.
Lyle
This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole
use of the recipient(s). Any use by other
;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN="Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]":MAILTO:lyle.t.be...@sprint.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Charlie Pe
rkins:MAILTO:charles.perk...@earthlink.net
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSV
:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0600
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN="Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]":MAILTO:lyle.t.be...@sprint.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=dmm@ietf.o
rg:MAILTO:dm
Charlie,
Thanks for the example. A couple of notes.
I appears that in your proposed terminology for Descriptors and Actions it is
not clear where Attribute Values appear. Are they the Settings we’ve been
using?
To your proposal “For simplicity, I suggest that the Policy Keys enable access
Addresses) w/o Rule and DPN assignment creates too much ambiguity, validation
cross checking in the DPN / Agent and would result in large, granular
hierarchies.
From: Charlie Perkins
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 10:08 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm
rity scenarios is not placing the operator in a
> comfortable situation.
From: Charlie Perkins
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 7:10 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about Interface Groups (formerly, DPN Groups)
Hello Lyle,
Thank
able to serve in the same group.
Lyle
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 3:25 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about Interface Groups (formerly, DPN Groups)
Hello Lyle,
I agree that:
1. - Interface
More inline.
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 2:27 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] Parent versus child mobility context
Hello Lyle,
More follow-up inline. We're getting c
ate for now, look at proposed
changes and then revisit this issue.
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 12:07 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about Interface Groups (formerly, DPN Groups)
Hello Lyle,
Comments inline.
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 11:54 AM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] ; Marco Liebsch
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Parent versus child mobility context
Hello Lyle and all,
I think I agree with
To: Charlie Perkins ; Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: Satoru Matsushima ; Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
; Moses, Danny ; Weaver, Farni [CTO]
; Matsushima Satoru
Subject: RE: Parent versus child mobility context
That has been introduced to reflect e.g. dedicated bearers which come on top of
default bearers h
YANG models" to "the FPC YANG models" as we do not want to
speak for all YANG models.
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 11:11 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: Marco Liebsch ; Satoru Matsushima
; Sri
No, I don’t think they should reside under a DPN. Groups like these also span
multiple DPNs which would make containment graphs far too confusing.
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 10:51 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: Marco Liebsch
Version bump and
we have a basic implementation (just the data structures) started here
https://gerrit.opencord.org/#/admin/projects/c3po?
A new version of I-D, draft-bertz-dime-policygroups-05.txt
has been successfully submitted by Lyle Bertz and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name:
This is a version bump
A new version of I-D, draft-bertz-dime-diamimpr-01.txt
has been successfully submitted by Lyle Bertz and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-bertz-dime-diamimpr
Revision: 01
Title: Diameter Specification Recommendations
Document date: 2017-
This is a version bump
A new version of I-D, draft-bertz-dime-predictunits-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Lyle Bertz and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-bertz-dime-predictunits
Revision: 03
Title: Diameter Predicted Units
Document date: 2017-12-29
tion/descritor?
>
> Cheers,
> --satoru
>
>> 2017/11/28 14:11、Moses, Danny のメール:
>>
>> I am OK with the current structure.
>>
>> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco Liebsch
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 23:45
>>
Does the type define type of value, or type of action/descritor?
Cheers,
--satoru
> 2017/11/28 14:11、Moses, Danny のメール:
>
> I am OK with the current structure.
>
> From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco Liebsch
> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 23:45
> To
.
From: Marco Liebsch [mailto:marco.lieb...@neclab.eu]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 9:54 AM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] ; dmm@ietf.org
Subject: RE: FPC: Move Descriptor-/Action-Value into Rule
Hi Lyle,
I see the analysis you brought, thanks for that. My proposal #2 is not my
preference as it was
only
Marco,
Thank you for the write up of both proposals. Forgive the length of the
response but I wanted to provide concrete examples based upon the existing data
types.
Summary, see below for examples and details:
- Satoru's Proposal (Proposal 1) - the use of only ID/Type could be
repl
Am I understanding that the hypothesis is that a 128 bit space (ID) is
sufficient to represent what is required in the packet to meet current and
planned mobility related use cases when coupled with the rest of the IPv6
standard header information (5-tuple)?
-Original Message-
From: dmm
I support the adoption.
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 6:03 PM
To: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: [DMM] Call for adoption of
draft-matsushima-spring-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-03 as DMM WG document
Folks:
The following message
All,
**This is not a new version of FPC** I am merely sending out the list of
changes for the one sent out last week.
Version 09 is the result of work at IETF 99 and subsequent meetings.
Changes since the last version:
1. No new features added (sorry) but just better support for
a.
-Original Message-
From: Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:51 AM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] ; Radek Krejčí
; draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-c...@ietf.org; dmm@ietf.org; Per
Hedeland
Subject: Re: [DMM] YANG validation issue in draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-06.txt
Hi Lyle,
Let
e working
groups pick up YANG.
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: Radek Krejčí [mailto:rkre...@cesnet.cz]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 8:39 AM
To: Benoit Claise ; Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
; draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-c...@ietf.org; dmm@ietf.org; Per
Hedeland
Subject: Re: [DMM] YANG validation issue i
There appears to be a bug in either the submission tool or confd (I suspect it
has to do with caching and updates). Will take this offline.
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 8:19 AM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] ;
draft
We will as soon as we can isolate the error. The error is unhelpful. Do you
have any guidance on it?
Also, is there any way to rid ourselves of those tailf warnings? They happen
quite often and our developers now ignore most errors coming from confd as
noise.
-Original Message-
From
Wrong list! My apologies! Please disregard.
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:21 AM
To: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: [DMM] RFC 4006 failover of alternate and backup servers
All,
The CC-Session-Failover AVP in its definition
All,
The CC-Session-Failover AVP in its definition uses 'backup server' but the ENUM
value for FAILOVER_SUPPORTED states
"Moving the credit-
control message stream to a backup server MAY require that
information related to the credit-control session should also be
forwarded to an al
k. so it's not in the dmm charter?
Where then should I submit the 'mobility over diameter' spec then?
-Original Message-
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 10:28 PM
To: jouni.nospam ; dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re:
+1
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco Liebsch
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 3:04 AM
To: Charlie Perkins
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] Change "Port" to ? [ was Re: I-D Action:
draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-05.txt]
Hello Charlie,
If we keep the port term, your proposal
It is a readout of work done. I can go 15 minutes (maybe 20 with technical
issues for presenting remotely).
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: jouni.nospam [mailto:jouni.nos...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:18 AM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM
Jouni,
I will be remote but would like to reserve a slot:
Implementation Status of FPC v04/05 – Discuss the implementation of FPC v04
that is mentioned in the draft as well as plans for v05 upgrades
Draft: draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-05
Time: 10 minutes
Lyle
-- Forwarded message
Thank you Benoit for pointing this out. We will correct in the next update.
Lyle
-Original Message-
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2016 10:07 AM
To: draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-c...@ietf.org; dmm@ietf.org
Subject: [DMM] We can't extrac
There is no related IPR that I am aware of.
From: Dapeng Liu [mailto:maxpass...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 10:47 AM
To: draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-par...@ietf.org
Cc: dmm
Subject: IPR call for draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-02
All authors: please reply to this
/wiki/System_Architecture_Evolution
I think you are confused by the SDN approaches in the control plane in 3GPP.
However, 3GPP decided not to pursue SDN. But they will pursue NFV instead.
FYI.
Regards,
Behcet
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
wrote:
> All,
>
>
>
> Last week at the I
All,
Last week at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco (US), Intel and Sprint
demonstrated a virtual Evolved Packet Core (vEPC) that included, amongst other
features, a SGW and PGW (3GPP functions similar to MAG and LMA). This software
1. Used a Separated Control and Dataplane Nod
51 matches
Mail list logo
