IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-xyx-5gip-ps-00.txt

Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Fri, 12 May 2017 02:15 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432AD12EB04 for <5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2017 19:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tQjwxYNvOR5w for <5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2017 19:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x234.google.com (mail-pf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 142AA12EA96 for <5gangip@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 May 2017 19:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id m17so22445229pfg.3 for <5gangip@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 May 2017 19:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=nDJiLe3bIYpRecyi9hhJjqBhSuGE+CzwOryAaahx2C4=; b=bHwLRkAjJ5Q/z1+w/S7XsfmWWYbIoKMQPc7JdJsqsFc2faTNeaqhiFx/YP+g5Tgk9E BF6qrfJPxD4CKjI3DbfKN40fqkR1e6Iyvq0yvaRMSgYgzjrniez8W1G3UgH90mloII3T 0/wbn/oJHdfoUnwQdE/boIy6xT5tW//ypNTf+jo928nZ7TXoZunzoZbJwwH5OCT2P6G4 oT2u2vw0l5thu8uh8jY5aqylklFTGdtKaBjRPgp9l/FDYjYui3APW7HnVxVHoQevxSm8 qMZzb6gK1Usfhel9up/fUSUu2CADZh76anIJ5k6JqUuKZ1GvC2cb9NToCM6cyoGykTpN OyfA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=nDJiLe3bIYpRecyi9hhJjqBhSuGE+CzwOryAaahx2C4=; b=VBmSiwvvubXdtz+4tDVcqXmg7nb9NIfuWrXVSqOql8j7yZ3K3XUpCRqBmG8i7o98KG 5dGuMdwAC7NN/J7OugxHpvQKkxHd6cW7k98bfzm9wa7f3boK14Bgp8mljoMEWITStjmu Con2AaLTzKyK6+O3E/Rp+OmHz6MFkzuYHFVOmyy38u5KD0azRekH8/5kNGAdGV/O4PFR oZZz9HPCcDmbmbe035y3loCgMaDMTd6VBQcyNF0q1ZWOu5CT+hHXPn/mognzLJRdAhPy Ho9Ckp2jqgwGU2T7q3cgyhj8VdCf678RmbSjuCtJXbyCog+UTwBYsX6N1cWSBNX/dqS/ zZIw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCwY2K61E19gBAVOI10rkEG7cVrS7VYE5Lx0zago3OltxVEmfMd mkxO0cQiK24LVSEzurY=
X-Received: by 10.84.176.129 with SMTP id v1mr2267139plb.192.1494555035735; Thu, 11 May 2017 19:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.5] (c-24-5-144-221.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.5.144.221]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m24sm2200749pfi.129.2017.05.11.19.10.34 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 May 2017 19:10:34 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <25B4902B1192E84696414485F5726854018A2F4C@SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 19:10:32 -0700
Cc: "d.lake@surrey.ac.uk" <d.lake@surrey.ac.uk>, "5gangip@ietf.org" <5gangip@ietf.org>, "cb.list6@gmail.com" <cb.list6@gmail.com>, "swmike@swm.pp.se" <swmike@swm.pp.se>, "samitac.ietf@gmail.com" <samitac.ietf@gmail.com>, "Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de" <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <58E01E89-DB68-4F97-9BE3-552699528865@gmail.com>
References: <149376035152.21552.16267155218438524059.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC8QAcfXDAQsv1MsCu7RAtBF6LC7Y_v8zutz1hOYkcbbRKT_cw@mail.gmail.com> <340a9b7fbfe5408bbc2f6d56e839009f@HE105831.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1705041251310.30304@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAD6AjGR6+KK5uMstJGDBM2X4RHSmONoZOrAe9JBFoc4Us78J5A@mail.gmail.com> <88b1db15dced45bca9427b042cc82192@HE105831.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <CAKmdBpdSEC9ZM4YJC2zxC53JwMdNmZMxoOuXNyFR_VrA-ddCxw@mail.gmail.com> <AM2PR06MB0882823A2088E10804043331B5EC0@AM2PR06MB0882.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com> <7B4F8607-E7A3-4EB8-BC29-015BB8821553@gmail.com> <25B4902B1192E84696414485F5726854018A2F4C@SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com>
To: Uma Chunduri <uma.chunduri@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/5gangip/3Egv7IGbMbCTngWe_D9wi0w43AA>
Subject: Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-xyx-5gip-ps-00.txt
X-BeenThere: 5gangip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of implications of the upcoming 5th Generation \(fixed and\) Mobile communication systems on IP protocols." <5gangip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/5gangip>, <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/5gangip/>
List-Post: <mailto:5gangip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip>, <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 02:15:37 -0000

> On 11 May 2017, at 16:36, Uma Chunduri <uma.chunduri@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> 	>The protocol choice will usually take place in “stage-3 groups". In this case it would be RAN3 afair. Their current working assumption for NG data transport (with a disclaimer) is already GTP - check TS38.414 & 38.424. 
>> Like it was with rel-8 the interesting & hectic part of the mobility takes place in RAN. Out of all efforts in rel-8 PMIP never made it into RAN par of the network. 
>> Too much legacy there.
> 
> +1. Indeed too much..
> Mobility is always built on anchor based solution and AFAIS, even today it's difficult to move away even 
> virtual use plane/EPC and non-3GPP access and few more items put pressure to have a different outcome.  
> May be too much at stake for the deployed base..(remember 4G upgrade is still happening).
> 
>> If there’s a desire to revert the TR38.801 decision on using GTP, the timeframe is getting tight. 
>> The good point is that RAN (S1, X2, etc) never used GTP-C as a control plane.
> 
> GTP is used on S1 (S1-C) and X2 for inter eNodeB data transfer during mobility (eNodeB).

Both S1-MME and X2-AP are protocols directly over SCTP. Nothing to do with GTP-C afair.

- Jouni


> 
> --
> Uma C.
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email