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

[Saleem Bhatti <[e-mail]>]

Tom;

On 24 May 2017, at 16:32, Tom Herbert <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Ca By <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Tom -- as a network operator, my ideal scenario just moves the packets.  To
that end, i would like to remove the anchor / touchpoint.

The scaling comment is that any anchor needs to scale to N where N is some
set of users total throughput. This is why ILNP appeals to me and ILA looks
like more of what we already have today with less functionality.

Ca,

ILA is a super set of ILNP use cases. ILA can be used end to end or as
a means to implement an overlay within the network or something in
between. The typical deployment is a hybrid approach. If a non-ILA
enable node is talking to a mobile node communications can go through
a router; else if the node is ILA capable then it can get the ILA
mapping to speak directly to the mobile node and eliminate the
triangular routing.

ILNP does not define an overlay mechanism or a tunnelling mechanism. However, I do not know a reason that ILNP could not be tunnelled, if tunnelling was required (for whatever reason).

While ILNP is designed to be end-to-end, it also supports various use-cases with the deployment of an ILNP-capable site-border router (SBR), e.g. a router at the edge of a radio (access) network. Such a SBR could be used as a control and management point for a radio (access) network.

RFC6748 gives an outline of some of the various use cases with an ILNP-capable SBR (perhaps not all of them are of interest to this list, however):

- localised numbering (localised addressing)
- site-multihoming
- mobility of whole networks/sites
- traffic engineering options
- options for datacentres, including wide-area virtual machine image migration
- identity privacy and location privacy

These are all possible without the loss of end-to-end state, and so can all be used together. For ILNPv6, they also preserve the current IPv6 addressing and numbering practises.

Cheers,
--/Saleem



Tom


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, <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> 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: <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:22 PM
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-xyx-5gip-ps-01.txt
To: Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Tom Herbert
<[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Roland Schott <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>,
SungHoon
Seo <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Roland Schott <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Dirk von
Hugo
<[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Satish Kanugovi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>



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
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip



_______________________________________________
5gangip mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip


_______________________________________________
5gangip mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip