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

Jinwei Xia <xiajinwei@huawei.com> Tue, 07 July 2009 12:39 UTC

Return-Path: <xiajinwei@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB2C3A6A2E for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 05:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.073
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.073 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.526, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1WiS+oc233wk for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 05:39:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F07313A67CC for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 05:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga01-in [172.24.2.3]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0KME005VTWFCIG@szxga01-in.huawei.com> for dime@ietf.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:38:00 +0800 (CST)
Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.1.33]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0KME005HMWFC3Q@szxga01-in.huawei.com> for dime@ietf.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:38:00 +0800 (CST)
Received: from x65217 ([10.164.12.67]) by szxml06-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0KME0087PWFBR7@szxml06-in.huawei.com> for dime@ietf.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:38:00 +0800 (CST)
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:37:59 +0800
From: Jinwei Xia <xiajinwei@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <AAF85A48-B1AD-4F07-BAD6-D33EB1C481E1@gmail.com>
To: 'jouni korhonen' <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Message-id: <000901c9feff$c3425670$430ca40a@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Thread-index: Acn+9rk9Tewsk7e8QXyCDe/QOA5X1gABeGSw
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-korhonen-dime-mip6-feature-bits-01
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:39:39 -0000

Hi Jouni,

Thank your feedback, please see inline.

> >
> > 	Do you think it is better to mark this ID as updates of 
> 5447?  With 
> > the stability of MCoA and DSMIP, both feature will be added in MIP 
> > Diameter Application.
> 
> I don't think the draft would update RFC5447. It just uses 
> the IANA procedures defined there. If something would be 
> updated that is the dime-mip6-split draft. However, that is 
> the draft we purposely removed these flags and spun off the 
> feature-bits draft.
> 

Sure. It makes sense to spin off one feature-bits ID to maintain Dime-MIP
base protocol stability .

> 
> >
> > 	However if you take PMIP feature into account, I 
> support this ID is 
> > independent from RFC5447 and Dime-PMIPv6. In such case, IMHO
> 
> dime-pmip6 draft already defines its own feature bits.

OK

> 
> 
> >
> > "Bulk_Termination" and "Bulk_Re_Registration" should be 
> involved in as 
> > PMIP feature.
> 
> 
> Do you suggest adding feature bits for bulk operations (the 
> recent work in netext)?

Yeah, since Dime-PMIP ID has entered IESG Processing stage, the remain
feature bits (e.g. Bulk operations which do not standardized yet) sponsored
in netext WG maybe should be added in a specific feature bits ID, make
sense? 


BR

	Jinwei

> 
> Cheers,
> 	Jouni
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > BR
> >
> > 	Jinwei
> >
> >>
> >> 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 <idsubmission@ietf.org>
> >>> Date: June 10, 2009 12:26:53 PM GMT+03:00
> >>> To: jouni.nospam@gmail.com
> >>> 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
> >> DiME@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> >
>