Re: [Dime] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-korhonen-dime-mip6-feature-bits-01

[jouni <[e-mail]>]

Hi Julien,

On Jul 8, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Julien Bournelle wrote:

> Hi jouni,
>
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 10:24 AM, jouni korhonen <[e-mail] 
> > wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> Well, the IANA allocation rules were crafted so that other SDOs  
> could easily allocate their own flags once they document flag usage  
> (the document can be any publicly available proper spec/document,  
> not just RFC). Having said that, allocating flags "ahead" without  
> relevant documentation which properly describe the use and need is  
> not really what we want. And having said that, I basically self- 
> conclude most flags the current I-D proposes are not needed ;)
>
>
>  not sure to catch your conclusion ! :)

;)  Meaning.. SDOs could (should) go and allocate feature vector flag  
bits on their own directly from IANA, once they have appropriate  
documentation.. without getting involved in IETF WG level process.

Regarding the proper documentation, I realize that draft-korhonen-dime- 
mip6-feature-bits does not really do a good job at explaining "use &  
need" for some flags it aims to allocate.


JOuni


>
>
>
> Cheers,
>        Jouni
>
>
>
> On Jul 8, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Julien Bournelle wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>  one question maybe is if it is the IETF or IANA which will be used  
> to register specifc SDO flags ?
>
>  Maybe we could have a specific range for such allocation ?
>
>  Any comments ?
>
>  Julien
>
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:05 AM, jouni korhonen  
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Could you point me at the relevant Wimax documents regarding the  
> flags below?
>
> Cheers,
>       Jouni
>
>
> On Jul 7, 2009, at 5:39 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jouni,
>  Can you please add
> IP4_IN_IP6_TUNNELING_SUPPORTED flag (which could be defined as:
> IP4_IN_IP6_TUNNELING_SUPPORTED (0x0000000000000100)
> )
>
> The need for this came out in a contribution we made to WiMAX NWG's  
> IPv4/v6 Transition subteam on the scenarios for DSMIP.
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: jouni korhonen <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 4:55:36 AM
> Subject: [Dime] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-korhonen- 
> dime-mip6-feature-bits-01
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have updated the additional feature bits draft. I did remove some  
> stuff so
> that the draft now only reserves MIP6-Feature-Vector flag bits and  
> nothing more.
> I'll forward the draft soon to RFC editor so if anyone has comments,  
> please be
> quick :)
>
> Cheers,
>   Jouni
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: IETF I-D Submission Tool
> Date: June 10, 2009 12:26:53 PM GMT+03:00
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-korhonen-dime-mip6-feature-bits-01
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-korhonen-dime-mip6-feature-bits-01.txt  
> has been
> successfuly submitted by Jouni Korhonen and posted to the IETF  
> repository.
>
> Filename:    draft-korhonen-dime-mip6-feature-bits
> Revision:    01
> Title:        Diameter MIP6 Feature Vector Additional Bit Allocations
> Creation_date:    2009-06-10
> WG ID:        Independent Submission
> Number_of_pages: 5
>
> Abstract:
> During the Mobile IPv6 Split Scenario bootstrapping the Mobile IPv6
> Home Agent and the Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting
> server may exchange a set of authorized mobility capabilities.  This
> document defines new mobility capability flags that are used to
> authorize per Mobile Node route optimization, Multiple Care-of
> Address and user plane traffic encryption support.  Furthermore, this
> document also defines a capability flag of indicating whether the
> Home Agent is authorized to act as a stand alone Virtual Private
> Network gateway.
>
>
>
> The IETF Secretariat.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>
>
>