Hi Charlie,
- It is claimed that a centralized architecture requires more resources
than a distributed architecture. This is usually false. For instance,
if a centralized node requires 100 units, and 100 distributed nodes each
require 1.03 units, the distributed architecture requires 3
Hello Dapeng,
Here are me few comments:
It is typically the role of a connection
manager to distinguish application capabilities and trigger the
mobility support accordingly.
and
Multiple IP address management: ability of the mobile node to
simultaneously use
Dapeng,
Mobility management and traffic redirection should only be
triggered due to IP mobility reasons, that is when the MN moves
from the point of attachment where the IP flow was originally
initiated.
Mobility management and traffic redirection may also be
Hello folks,
Few comments on this I-D:
For next MN's movements the process is repeated except for the number
of P-MAARs involved, that rises accordingly to the number of prefixes
that the MN wishes to maintain. Indeed, once the CMD receives the
first PBU from the new S-MAAR, it
Hi Jouni,
Thanks for the review and comments.
Alper,
I read the draft and have few quick comments and questions. Interesting
draft by the way. In Section 3.1. it says:
- Access Network Anchored Address
This type of IP address provides IP session continuity but not IP
address
of Science
--
Sender: Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org
Receiver: Jouni Korhonen jouni.nos...@gmail.com
Copy: dmm@ietf.org dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] comments/questions of draft-yegin-dmm-cnet-homing-00
On Jul 24, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
Alper
Hi Pete,
This obviously wouldn't work for billions of MNs. But, with DMM people
are starting to realize that MNs don't need completely stable global addresses
that live forever.
Most don't, but some do. We need to account for them as well.
So I think DMM should focus on localized
Hi Jouni,
On Mar 20, 2014, at 6:03 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
o Mobility state exposing I-D. This would communication
between the end host and the network. Maybe also covering
the missing parts within the end host.. Are we OK with one
I-D or how people want to see this?
o ..
There's
Hello folks,
Remember I was proposing to have conference calls for people to present their
proposals and have discussions around them.
Having more discussions would help us make better progress, not only within DMM
or other WGs in IETF, but even in larger scale in the industry.
Now I'm
…
Alper
On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:53 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
Hi Alper,
I went to Doodle and noticed that the times have been arranged according to
non-North American audience.
Was this deliberate?
Regards,
Behcet
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org
:
Hi,
Alper Yegin is inviting you to this WebEx meeting
Hi Jouni,
DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment
model, by distributing forwarding functions at optimal location; for
example, closer either to the mobile user or the corresponding node.
s/user/node
Although the maintenance of stable home address(es)
On Mar 26, 2014, at 5:47 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
On Mar 26, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org wrote:
Hi Jouni,
DMM can be used to realise such a distributed deployment
model, by distributing forwarding functions at optimal location; for
example
You already have text for that: Forwarding path and signalling management
You can use that name for the deliverable.
Alper
On Mar 26, 2014, at 8:25 PM, Jouni wrote:
On Mar 26, 2014, at 8:11 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
On Mar 26, 2014, at 5:47 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
On Mar 26
Ryuji's slides are here:
http://yegin.org/NGmobility/20140327-vEPC.pdf
On Mar 25, 2014, at 12:36 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
See below for this Friday's Webex call details.
Alper
Begin forwarded message:
Hi,
Alper Yegin is inviting you to this WebEx meeting
:
Hi,
Alper Yegin is inviting you to this WebEx meeting
the maintenance part.
What do the others think?
- Jouni
On Apr 4, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Jouni,
One more thing:
The DMM working group will also work on maintenance-oriented and
incremental extensions to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol, specified
in RFC
Folks,
Charlie will be giving a talk: Wireless handovers: relative importance of
various technologies
There are two candidate dates. Please register your availability on the
following doodle, before the end of next Monday (April 28).
http://doodle.com/atpvfek9b2zf5b82
Cheers,
Alper
:
Hi,
Alper Yegin is inviting you to this WebEx meeting
Folks,
You can find Charlie's slides at:
http://yegin.org/NGmobility/Why802-May2014.pptx
Alper
On Apr 29, 2014, at 2:46 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
Please see below for the details of the upcoming Next-Generation Mobility
Protocols and Architectures call.
Cheers,
Alper
-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analy...@tools.ietf.org; 'Alper Yegin';
pierrick.se...@orange.com
Subject: 答复: Mail regarding draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis
Hello Charlie,
Please let us know whether the following answer address your concern:
1.In my understanding, PMIP/DSMIP
Inter-working between mobility functions and network nodes, e.g. routers,
requires the use of some non-mobility protocol. DMM should at least describe
which states (identifiers, locator addresses/IDs, ..) to expose through these
protocols. That's what I understood behind mobility state
to the mobile node and its applications from the network.
I suppose this clarifies that the “anchor re-selection” can apply to a single
session also?
BR,
John
-Original Message-
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alper Yegin
Sent: Friday, June 06
– the current text would support a
solution regardless of the specific scenario/design.
But, if it the text is being interpreted in a specific way, I don’t have any
serious reservations against clarification.
Best Regards,
John
From: Alper Yegin [mailto:alper.ye...@yegin.org]
Sent
Can someone clarify the intent of that text?
Alper
On Jun 7, 2014, at 10:37 AM, Jouni wrote:
Ack. John Alper, any specific wording you want to clarify?
- Jouni
On Jun 7, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Hi John,
In that case we need a clarification and refinement
(even if it became clearer to the meeting
participants…).
Alper
On Jun 8, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Dapeng Liu wrote:
Hello All,
The meeting minutes of Friday teleconference is enclosed.
--
Dapeng Liu
在 2014年6月8日 星期日，0:39，Alper Yegin 写道：
11pm pacific is 2am east coast us…. not good
On Jun 9, 2014, at 9:17 AM, Jouni wrote:
On Jun 9, 2014, at 5:45 AM, Weixinpeng wrote:
Hi Jouni, all,
.The protocol solutions
should be based on existing IP mobility protocols, either host- or
network-based, such as Mobile IPv6 [RFC6275, ], Proxy Mobile IPv6
) as a DMM solution, or something that
would co-exist with DMM solutions…
Alper
On Jun 9, 2014, at 9:30 AM, Jouni wrote:
On Jun 6, 2014, at 5:37 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Hello Jouni, DMM folks,
We better clarify what anchor re-selection stands for.
If it is about selecting different
:
On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:52 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Hi John,
My reading of that sentence is different.
To me it says We cannot assume that the solutions we are developing would
be available on all networks across the Internet.
The highlighted text intend to say:
unless the mobile node
:
Alper,
6/9/2014 4:21 PM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
Jouni,
OK, let's go with the PMIP example….
Let's say there's an ongoing flow, Flow1, via MAG1 and LMA1.
You are talking about switching LMA2 with LMA1, while maintaining MAG1 and
not breaking Flow1 (i.e., retaining the same IP address
Hello Folks,
Pierrick will be giving a talk on Next-Generation POP in the context of
mobility management.
Please register your availability on the following doodle before the end of
Thursday.
http://doodle.com/v584xke9qpzdnyfa
Cheers,
Alper
___
/2014 5:37 PM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
Hello Jouni, DMM folks,
We better clarify what anchor re-selection stands for.
If it is about selecting different anchors for different IP flows, that's
one thing.
If it is about changing the IP anchor in the middle of an IP flow, that's
another thing
.
Opinions?
- Jouni
6/6/2014 5:37 PM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
Hello Jouni, DMM folks,
We better clarify what anchor re-selection stands for.
If it is about selecting different anchors for different IP flows, that's
one thing.
If it is about changing the IP anchor in the middle
solutions.
I presume these 3 items map to the those two bullets in the charter. Right?
I cannot clearly tell the mapping though.
Alper
On Jun 12, 2014, at 12:14 AM, Jouni wrote:
Alper,
On Jun 11, 2014, at 10:54 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Hi Jouni,
o Enhanced mobility anchoring: define
protocol is known - PMIP, and the solution aims to
distribution within PMIP's boundaries.
What is unclear here?
Jouni
--
Jouni Korhonen
Broadcom
(Sent from my mobile..)
Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org kirjoitti 12.6.2014 kello 9.09:
Jouni,
Based on earlier discussions
Doodle poll is closed.
Majority has preferred Wednesday, July 2, 4pm Central European Time. Please
mark your calendars.
Webex call details will come later…
Cheers,
Alper
On Jun 10, 2014, at 11:44 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Hello Folks,
Pierrick will be giving a talk on Next-Generation
How are we going to make progress on solution discussions when all we have is a
single 2-hr session for the whole DMM WG?
Begin forwarded message:
From: IETF Agenda age...@ietf.org
Subject: IETF 90 Preliminary Agenda
Date: June 23, 2014 10:16:20 PM GMT+03:00
To: IETF Announcement List
Hello folks,
Pierrick will be giving another talk, this one titled IP Mobility Protocols
for Multihomed Residential Gateways (RG) in Fixed Networks.
I've setup a doodle for determining the time slot:
http://doodle.com/733h3d9drdz78i2d
Register your available times on the doodle no later then
ed message:
Hi,
Alper Yegin is inviting you to this Web
Hello DMMers,
We have a new I-D for your reading and discussion.
Title : IP Mobility Orchestrator
Authors : Alper Yegin
Jungshin Park
Kisuk Kweon
Jinsung Lee
Filename : draft-yegin-ip-mobility-orchestrator-00.txt
Reply-To: internet-dra...@ietf.org
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : On Demand Mobility Management
Authors : Alper Yegin
Kisuk Kweon
Jinsung Lee
Folks,
Doodle is closed.
The most popular date was July 17, 4pm CET.
Please mark your calendars.
Alper
On Jun 30, 2014, at 11:24 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Hello folks,
Pierrick will be giving another talk, this one titled IP Mobility Protocols
for Multihomed Residential Gateways (RG
is used to discovery CN’s
mobility capability? Could be explain how it works?
We are thinking of defining new DNS resource records to store mobility
capability in DNS.
Alper
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Xinpeng
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alper Yegin
Sent: Friday, July
Sri and Marco,
Is any of what you are describing captured in the existing drafts? If so,
please provide the pointers.
Alper
On Jul 11, 2014, at 8:45 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote:
Hi Marco,
I think we may have to qualify the term anchor. In our conf calls we used
the terms,
Folks,
I went over the solutions and categorized them.
I haven't covered all of the solutions (due to lack of time). For any I-D that
is missing, please state the name and where you think it belongs to.
When we agree with the categorization and the candidates for each, then we can
proceed to
connection. But, it can maintain its previous IP
address with the help of a tunnel between the s-GW and the MN or t-GW.
This is what we call access network anchoring.
Alper
- Jouni
7/4/2014 10:10 AM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
Hello DMMers,
We have a new I-D for your reading and discussion
Slides are at: http://yegin.org/NGmobility/MultihomedRG_DMM.pdf
On Jul 16, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
Tomorrow's presentation is IP Mobility Protocols for Multihomed Residential
Gateways (RG) in Fixed Networks by Pierrick.
See below for the Webex details.
Alper
-GW was lost, it does not imply discarding the IP from the interface..
Yes, we can elaborate on that.
Thanks.
Alper
- Jouni
Alper
- Jouni
7/4/2014 10:10 AM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
Hello DMMers,
We have a new I-D for your reading and discussion.
Title
Folks,
Let's change gears.
We'd like to propose draft-yegin-dmm-ondemand-mobility-02 for WG adoption.
This draft falls under the following deliverable:
Exposing mobility state to mobile nodes and network nodes:
define solutions that allow, for example, mobile nodes to select
on
the mailing list and make WG adoption official.
We should progress…
Alper
On Jul 17, 2014, at 7:03 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
Alper,
The charter text you cite is not approved yet. I-D adoption requests at this
point are premature.
- Jouni
7/17/2014 9:19 AM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti
make sure you stay within your allocated time slot
with your powerpoint marathon and actually have some time left for the QA.
- Jouni Dapeng
6/24/2014 12:22 AM, Behcet Sarikaya kirjoitti:
Friday (after)noon session :)
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org
Intense reading… :-) Lot of abstractions, which I can only follow by relating
to specific solutions.
In my understanding, what Sri is describing is about how to apply UP/CP
separation to various DMM solutions.
In the examples I see a number of DMM solutions defined with UP/CP separation
using
discussing is a solution approach which has the essential
properties of CP/DP separation, aspect of optimized/stateless data plane,
application specific gateway allocations .. etc and that at the end is an
approach for realizing DMM.
Sri
On 7/17/14 10:59 AM, Alper Yegin alper.ye
draft-mccann-dmm-flatarch-00
Alper
The issue seems to be charter approval.
Sri
On 7/17/14 11:04 AM, Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org wrote:
Why? Why not make technical progress at every opportunity?
This extreme serialization and every step overly stretchingŠ. am I
-14AA394AEDEE.png
Sri
From: Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org
Date: Thursday, July 17, 2014 12:39 PM
To: Sri Gundavelli sgund...@cisco.com
Cc: Marco Liebsch marco.lieb...@neclab.eu, dmm@ietf.org dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] demand for DMM traffic steering
Sri,
PMIP is a solution.
You
AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
I agree that the discussions were kept at a high level.
But as I noted then and now, I disagree with still keeping the discussions at
high level… It's still hovering at 10k feet...
If we want to make real progress, we need to start bringing the discussion to
low
I've updated the list with the I-Ds suggested by Behcet/Fred/Jouni.
Please see below for my opinions about how each category relates to the overall
work.
Comments welcome.
1. Per-flow IP address configuration according to mobility needs
Apps indicating their mobility needs to the IP stack
below:
7/19/2014 11:44 AM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
*
*
I've updated the list with the I-Ds suggested by Behcet/Fred/Jouni.
Please see below for my opinions about how each category relates to the
overall work.
Comments welcome.
*
*
*
*
*1. Per-flow IP address configuration according
I may be interpreting the charter incorrectly, but I think there may be
a disconnect. I interpreted the the charter text as describing
deployment models like:
- Wi-Fi-based mobility management
- Cellular (e.g., 3GPP) mobility management
- Mixed technology mobility management
- etc.
Actually, according to IETF rules, we even need a 2-week notice.
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html
Conference calls and jabber sessions must be announced at least two weeks
prior to the event.
Alper
On Jul 28, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Wow
Hello,
Thank you Kostas for this rewrite. The charter reads better now.
Please see below for few comments.
On Jul 30, 2014, at 11:20 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
Folks,
A major rewrite of the charter is in github (and below). Thanks to Kostas
providing excellent feedbask on the text.
Dear DMMers,
Here's an update on 3GPP SA1 CSIPTO work…
Two weeks ago there was an SA1 meeting (SA1#67), and in that meeting SA1 has
completed the CSIPTO normative work.
As you might remember, SA1 is in charge of defining service requirements.
The next step for CSIPTO is to initiate a work item
Is this to minimize the states in the network, or is the intention to limit
the control-plane
signaling with the mobile device to setup/teardown the connection?
Thanks for your feedback in advance,
marco
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alper Yegin
Sent: Montag, 1. September
Folks,
There was discussion about necessity of APIs for DMM yesterday.
Let's continue that discussion here.
It is true that IETF's primary focus is protocol design.
But when it's necessary, IETF also defines APIs.
See, IPv6 basic socket API, for example.
And, as a very relevant item, see RFC
Alex,
DMM is not meant to be only about a bunch of MIP-based solutions.
There are various components in DMM solution space that'd also work with
GTP-based architectures.
For example, identifying the mobility needs of flows.
Or, conveying the mobility characteristic of a prefix to the UE.
Alper
From meeting minutes:
(Jouni) I suggest that we left the bullet as a work item and we do not have
explicit milestone
for it. we can add this milestone when we actually see that there is something
meaningful
forming for that document.
The decision at the meeting was to leave the work item in
Hi Alex,
On Sep 5, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 10:48, Alper Yegin a écrit :
Alex,
DMM is not meant to be only about a bunch of MIP-based solutions.
There are various components in DMM solution space that'd also work with
GTP-based architectures.
For example
Alex,
The most robust way is to let the application tell the IP stack.
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-yegin-dmm-ondemand-mobility-02.txt
Sounds reasonable.
A complimentary means is to look at this as a source address selection
problem: given two addresses configured on an interface
-revive
a draft stating this in more detail?
Regards,
Charlie P.
On 9/5/2014 1:48 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Alex,
DMM is not meant to be only about a bunch of MIP-based solutions.
There are various components in DMM solution space that'd also work with
GTP-based architectures.
For example
: Re: [DMM] A Day in the Life of an Enterprise Mobile Device User
Le 04/09/2014 08:47, Alper Yegin a écrit :
Hi Fred,
Can this scenario not be realized by simply placing an HA in the
enterprise network and using Mobile IP?
I guess yes and no.
YEs, in that it is a typical Mobile IP
Folks,
Here's a proposal for scoping out the DMM work and identifying areas to tackle.
http://yegin.org/NGmobility/IETF_DMM_WG_work_scoping.pptx
I can present this at the upcoming DMM call. It'd be very good if people can
read and send comments/questions on the list in advance.
Cheers,
Alper
-yegin-ip-mobility-orchestrator-00 (Presentation:http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-dmm-7.pdf)Cheers,AlperBegin forwarded message:From: Alper Yegin via Cisco WebEx ad...@webex.comSubject: Invitation to WebEx meeting: IETF DMM Mobility Exposure Selection WT callDate: October 13, 2014 11
Hello folks,
Here are few clarification questions and comments on the Forwarding Path
Signaling Management WT discussion material (oh, maybe it's time we start
numbering these WTs :-)
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2014/10/07/dmm/slides/slides-interim-2014-dmm-3-1.pdf
- Are we not
, Alper Yegin alper.ye...@yegin.org wrote:
Hello folks,
Here are few clarification questions and comments on the Forwarding Path
Signaling Management WT discussion material (oh, maybe it's time we
start numbering these WTs :-)
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2014/10/07/dmm/slides
Folks,
We held our first meeting on Mobility Exposure and Selection WT today.
The meeting was attended by: Fred, Danny, Jouni, Xinpeng, Anthony, John K.,
Byoung-Jo J, Alper.
You can see the outcome of the first call as captured in the following PPT:
Folks,
Let's schedule the second call on the week before IETF (as we discussed in
call#1).
Please fill in this doodle no later than the end of Monday (Oct 27).
http://doodle.com/etb6asznw8taggzq
I know Marco is arranging a call for the other WT. I'll make sure we don't
conflict with their's
.
Alper
On Oct 23, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
Let's schedule the second call on the week before IETF (as we discussed in
call#1).
Please fill in this doodle no later than the end of Monday (Oct 27).
http://doodle.com/etb6asznw8taggzq
I know Marco is arranging
Today we held the second call on DMM Mobility Exposure and Selection.
Attendees: Danny, Pierrick, Sri, Byoung-Jo J, Alper
Outcome of the call is captured in the following slides:
http://yegin.org/NGmobility/DMM_WG_Exposure_Selection_WT-Call2-r1.pptx
Questions/comments welcome.
Alper
I agree, anchor is not the right term.
We can go with DPN or DPE.
A node is said to have DPN functionality if it can apply special forwarding
policy to a set of nodes (as opposed to forwarding traffic based on aggregate
routes, as a plain router would do).
The policy is provided by a
with the API).
We intend to schedule that one in about 2 weeks.
Alper
On Feb 9, 2015, at 9:59 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
See below for the Webex details.
Remember, the call is on Tue, Feb 10, at 4pm CET.
And don't forget to read the documents in the reading list prior
it there. The I-D is a short reading.
Alper
Thanks,
marco
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alper Yegin
Sent: Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2015 12:43
To: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] Mobility Exposure and Selection WT call
Hello,
Yesterday's call was attended by: Danny
to
schedule that one in about 2 weeks.
Alper
On Feb 9, 2015, at 9:59 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
See below for the Webex details. Remember, the call is on Tue,
Feb 10, at 4pm CET. And don't forget to read the documents in
the reading list prior to the call.
Attendees
-88-dmm-8.pdf
5. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-dmm-mobility-api-02
Alper
On Jan 23, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
Please mark your availability on the following doodle for our next DMM WG
Mobility Exposure and Selection WT call:
http://doodle.com
I see very light participation in Doodle. Is there a particular reason?
Let me extend the Doodle deadline to end of Monday, Feb 16.
http://doodle.com/b67r4bgcefeczbms
Hopefully more people will join the poll and the subsequent call.
Alper
On Feb 11, 2015, at 1:54 PM, Alper Yegin wrote
in about 2 weeks.
Alper
On Feb 9, 2015, at 9:59 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
Folks,
See below for the Webex details.
Remember, the call is on Tue, Feb 10, at 4pm CET.
And don't forget to read the documents in the reading list prior to the call.
Attendees shall read the following material
Folks,
Here's the doodle for setting the date for our next call.
In this call we'll discuss items #2 and #3, which involve the IP address
configuration enhancements to support the on-demand mobility API.
item #2. Describe how IP address type information is conveyed from network to
MN.
item
for later
update with more refined types)
Best Regards
Dirk
From: Alper Yegin [mailto:alper.ye...@yegin.org]
Sent: Donnerstag, 19. März 2015 19:04
To: von Hugo, Dirk
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] WG adoption for draft-yegin-ondemand-mobility-03
Hello Dirk,
Thanks
a HoA from a centrally-located Home
= The mobile host configures a HoA from a centrally-located Home
Thanks!
Thank you!
Alper
Best Regards
Dirk
From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alper Yegin
Sent: Mittwoch, 18. März 2015 10:54
To: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: [DMM] WG
elaborate.
Alper
Dapeng
Alper
--
Dapeng Liu
在 2015年3月25日 星期三，下午2:02，Alper Yegin 写道：
Hello Dapeng and Alex,
I hope you had a chance to digest our responses to your comments and
questions about the API work.
If you have any remaining issues, please let us know over
Hello Seil,
As I understand, this new flag helps apps tell the IP stack to configure a
new/additional IP address even if the IP stack is already configured with there
requested type address.
It'd be good to spell this out in the I-D.
And also, it'd be good to explain why this might be needed,
to record the meeting./FONT/FONT
SUMMARY:DMM Mobility Exposure and Selection WT call#5
PRIORITY:5
CLASS:PUBLIC
BEGIN:VALARM
TRIGGER:-PT5M
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:Reminder
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
On Feb 17, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:OK, poll is closed.The call will be on Feb 24
Hello,
Today's call was attended by: Danny, Byoung-Jo Kim, Jouni, Seil, Sergio
Figueiredo, Sri, John K., and Alper.
Slides (including notes) can be found at:
http://yegin.org/NGMobility/DMM_WG_Exposure_Selection_WT-Call4.pptx
Questions/comments welcome.
Alper
IP Address,
then I believe the developer would always wants to use the Fixed IP
address, rather than the other ones. Because even though the application
could cope with IP address
change, but the IP address change is not what the application want.
-Xinpeng
发件人: Alper Yegin
Hi Xinpeng,
On Mar 26, 2015, at 10:49 PM, Weixinpeng (Jackie) wrote:
I think it's good to start serval work teams to process the work.
If there are some people complain about this, I think the reason would be
that it
might be not convient for them to participate in the online interim
[mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Alper Yegin
发送时间: 2015年3月27日, 星期五 5:20
收件人: Weixinpeng (Jackie)
抄送: dmm@ietf.org
主题: Re: [DMM] DMM work teams
Hi Xinpeng,
On Mar 26, 2015, at 10:49 PM, Weixinpeng (Jackie) wrote:
I think it's good to start serval work teams to process the work
the application
could cope with IP address
change, but the IP address change is not what the application want.
-Xinpeng
发件人: Alper Yegin [alper.ye...@yegin.org]
发送时间: 2015年3月27日 2:13
收件人: Weixinpeng (Jackie)
抄送: Dapeng Liu; dmm@ietf.org
主题: Re: Re： DMM API
Hi Xinpeng,
If your
used in most
cases. If this is the case, why we need a new name for it?
If you don't name it, how would you refer to it in this context?
Alper
--
Dapeng Liu
在 2015年3月25日 星期三，下午2:02，Alper Yegin 写道：
Hello Dapeng and Alex,
I hope you had a chance to digest our responses
Hi Dapeng,
[as an individual contributor]
I support the idea of “Exposing mobility state to mobile nodes and network
nodes” as described in our charter.
For this particular draft, after some offline discussion with the authors,
I still have the following comments/suggestions:
1.
for your elaboration.
Regards,
Seil
From: Alper Yegin [mailto:alper.ye...@yegin.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 7:03 AM
To: Seil Jeon
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] [dmm] #49 (ondemand-mobility): full on-demand mobility
support
So, the idea is, when this flag
, at 2:11 AM, Seil Jeon wrote:
Hi Alper,
Regards,
Seil
-Original Message-
From: Alper Yegin [mailto:alper.ye...@yegin.org]
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 8:50 PM
To: Seil Jeon
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] [dmm] #49 (ondemand-mobility): full on-demand mobility
support
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
