Re: [5gangip] FW: New Version Notification for draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01.txt

Folks,

I remain very skeptical about the value of this group's collected
protocols.  The scope overlaps with work in the 3GPP, contradicts work in
the 3GPP, and the proposed ideas here are not obviously high value or fit
for the internet or mobile networks.

Don't get me wrong, i am not in love with the 3GPP and i think there is a
lot to improve on many fronts.  But,  MAMS and LISP and ILA are not on the
short list of approaches i would hold up the 3GPP and say this is a better
way.  In fact, MAMS as a proxy and ILA as a NAT are exactly the legacy
telco stuff i would expect the IETF to work against in favor of a more
secure, more salable, and more end-to-end internet.

AFAIK, FMC is already solved today.  My very own iPhone can make calls on
WiFi, LTE, and switch between the 2 -- this is all standard 3GPP work from
IMS. When i sit outside my house with bad wifi, the UE bounces between WiFi
and LTE endlessly, but this unstable network does not interrupt me
streaming Youtube.  So, i just don't see a problem to be solved here,
especially if it incurs a great deal of complexity and state and
signalling.  That said, MIF and Happy Eyeballs both address this issue of
performance and network selection -- and i would strongly suggest the UE is
in the best position to determine network quality and user experience.

I can't get over it this reduction: MAMs adds a proxy and ILA adds a NAT.
I just don't think that is architecturally wise in 4G or 5G.   They just
can't  scale in a gigabit broadband 5G usecase [which is the usecase that
pays the bills, not the pie in the sky stuff], and don't add meaningful
value, and simply detract value at scale.  Also, ILA and MAMs takes a lot
of work on the UE.  Getting changes into the UE is very hard, it took 10
years from the standardization of IMS to get functional IMS client (VoLTE)
deployed at scale.

Finally, the 5G ship has already sailed.  Many network are "launching 5G"
this year, and more networks (including the one i work at ) are committed
to launching "real 5G" in the next 2 to 3 years.  None of the work in this
group is within that 5G scope AFAIK. So, it may be most appropriate to
carry on the effort at 6G to avoid folks getting confused.

I still hold out hope for ILNP to replace the mobility core at some future
date, the radio network just does a simple authentication and that is all.
But, that is my own dream of a simpler world :)  I would suggest the
standard we look for in this group is:  what can we remove from 3GPP 5G /
6G, not what we can add.  How does the work in this group reduce NET
signalling and user-plane modification from the 3GPP steady state?  How is
that quantified?

CB

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 2:53 AM, <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We have updated the PS draft on 5G IP issues regarding the planned BoF in
> Prague.
>
> Please check whether we have addressed the comments correctly and continue
> to discuss this towards further improvement.
>
> Thanks a lot – also on behalf of Roland, SungHoon, and Behcet
>
>
>
> Best Regards
> Dirk
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
> Date: Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:22 PM
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01.txt
> To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>,
> Roland Schott <roland.schott@telekom.de>, SungHoon Seo <sh.seo@kt.com>,
> Roland Schott <Roland.Schott@telekom.de>, Dirk von Hugo <
> dirk.von-hugo@telekom.de>, Satish Kanugovi <satish.k@nokia.com>
>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Behcet Sarikaya and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:           draft-xyx-5gip-ps
> Revision:       01
> Title:          5G IP Access and Session Management Protocols
> Document date:  2017-05-22
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          14
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01.
> txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xyx-5gip-ps/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01
> Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01
> Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01
>
> Abstract:
>    This document builds upon 5G IP issues work and - based on a
>    simplified 5G system architecture - attempts to make the case for a
>    possible set of new protocols that need to be developed to be used
>    among various virtualized functions in a 5G network.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 5gangip mailing list
> 5gangip@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip
>
>