Re: [DMM] conclusion of adoption calls

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jouni,


On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Jouni Korhonen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> <in a chair mode>
>
> This thread is starting to sound like a broken record. We are chartered to
> have the maintenance responsibility of Mobile IPv6 protocol family. Once the
> chairs see absence of "maintenance oriented" documents that responsibility
> will be terminated. Till then, if someone does not like Mobile IPv6 protocol
> family work being done - just defer contributing. That's the natural way of
> aging out topics in IETF. Enough of this for now!
>
> Another data point to add here. To my (probably misguided?) understanding
> PMIP6 has more live deployments than MIP6 today. My understanding is that
> there are still operators running PMIP6 based networks and some vendors
> developing networking gear with PMIP6 support.
>

This paragraph conflicts the first one, now you are opening another
discussion point.

Can you please kindly be more specific?

Respectfully yours,

Behcet
> - Jouni
>
>
> 1/11/2016, 9:47 AM, Behcet Sarikaya kirjoitti:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Thierry Ernst <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The purpose of conference papers is to do research, so I don’t see how
>>> conferences papers would help to do … maintenance of IETF RFCs. In addition
>>> to bug fixes, MIPv6 and NEMO need to be progressed in the IETF hierarchy of
>>> standards. There are issues and options to be discussed, probably even
>>> extensions; a WG must host such work. My take is that dmm is the right
>>> candidate WG for this to happen.
>>>
>>
>> I still don't see any statements from you on the real need or use. You
>> talk as if even a BoF is needed, if yes that's what you should go for.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Behcet
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Thierry Ernst.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Le 11 janv. 2016 à 17:35, Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 5:56 AM, Thierry Ernst <[e-mail]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What are protocols you think no one uses ?
>>>>>
>>>>> MIPv6 and NEMOv6 needs maintenance, and probably more than than
>>>>> maintenance.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thierry, I meant PMIPv6 which was designed for operator networks.
>>>>
>>>> For MIPv6/NEMOv6, I think in Europe, some research based use is
>>>> happening, to my knowledge at a very small scale.
>>>> mip6 WG has been closed long time ago.
>>>> I wish it were still open, that would be like in good old days.
>>>>
>>>> So conference papers and ISE is still my recipe.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Behcet
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Thierry Ernst.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 8 janv. 2016 à 20:48, Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]> a
>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Jouni.nosmap <[e-mail]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well one can always pursue ISE/AD sponsored track if one so feels
>>>>>>> like.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just saying there are options..  if one desires to go through the WG
>>>>>>> process DMM has provisions for Mobile IPv6 protocol family maintenance work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I started this thread by stating that:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me ask what is the point in maintaining the protocols that no one
>>>>>> uses?
>>>>>> For academic purposes? If yes, then they should find their places in
>>>>>> the conferences or journals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one objected to the first point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what is the justification for maintenance? As I said before,
>>>>>> charter items can be changed or they do not have to be used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Behcet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jouni
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from a smart phone.. Mind the typos..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]> kirjoitti 8.1.2016 kello
>>>>>>>> 9.15:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Jouni Korhonen
>>>>>>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As Sri pointed out DMM is OK to work on "maintenance-oriented
>>>>>>>>> extensions of
>>>>>>>>> the Mobile IPv6 protocol family". So this is likely the venue
>>>>>>>>> within IETF.
>>>>>>>>> Mobile IPv4 as such has no place here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why not ISE? For both MIPv6 and MIPv4.
>>>>>>>> Of course you may not be able modify existing RFCs but just write it
>>>>>>>> as a new draft and do not bother dmm where future protocol work is
>>>>>>>> supposed to be done.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Behcet
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Jouni
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1/8/2016, 6:50 AM, Thierry Ernst kirjoitti:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Alex, all,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My understanding of what Jouni wrote is that it’s fine to work on
>>>>>>>>>> MIP6
>>>>>>>>>> improvement, but the MIP4 can live its life as is, to which I
>>>>>>>>>> totally agree.
>>>>>>>>>> And I also agree with Alex that we need to fix bugs in MIP6 (and
>>>>>>>>>> the related
>>>>>>>>>> suite, in particular NEMO) and progress them in the standard
>>>>>>>>>> track. It has
>>>>>>>>>> been too long since we last work on those and now it is certainly
>>>>>>>>>> right to
>>>>>>>>>> do it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, the question is if DMM is the right place or not to do the
>>>>>>>>>> work, if
>>>>>>>>>> not I would like to hear about alternatives within the IETF.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Thierry.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Le 8 janv. 2016 à 13:54, Alexandre Petrescu
>>>>>>>>>>> <[e-mail]> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Le 22/12/2015 04:56, Jouni a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Behcet,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your constructive comments. I believe academic
>>>>>>>>>>>> conferences/journals are not appropriate venues for PMIPv6/MIPv6
>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance since these protocol families are already past their
>>>>>>>>>>>> prime time as “hot research topics". Looking at the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>> charter
>>>>>>>>>>>> I cannot find too much love towards anything IPv4 so I think we
>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>> let MIPv4 finally rest in peace.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jouni I can agree with you in general.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But let me suggest that MIPv4 and MIPv6 are two implementations
>>>>>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>>>>> important in some places including where I work.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are no longer 'hot' as you say, but there are certainly
>>>>>>>>>>> protocol and
>>>>>>>>>>> implementation bugs which need correction.  Actually some of the
>>>>>>>>>>> corrections
>>>>>>>>>>> have already been applied but are not reflected in RFCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sometimes there is a feeling of frustration if implementations
>>>>>>>>>>> thrive
>>>>>>>>>>> where WG cares little.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <provocative> a widespread implementation of MIP6 is still bugged
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> does not respect the MIPv6 RFC - do you want that discussed
>>>>>>>>>>> publicly?</provocative>.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Jouni
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 Dec 2015, at 09:46, Behcet Sarikaya
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jouni, all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me ask what is the point in maintaining the protocols that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one uses? For academic purposes? If yes, then they should find
>>>>>>>>>>>>> their places in the conferences or journals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, mip4 WG has been closed. So is dmm going to maintain mip4
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Behcet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jouni, all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Although I'm already late, I just wanted to express my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post-adoption call to the three drafts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carlos
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 08:32 -0800, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The WG adoption call for all three I-Ds have completed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> draft-gundavelli-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-00
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> draft-yan-dmm-hnprenum-03 draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The adoption for the first two was unanimous. The last
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (draft-seita- *) received few concerns but the number of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supporters was enough to convince the chairs there is enough
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interest and support to work on it. The chairs encourage the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authors of draft-seite-* to pay close attention and work out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the concerns raised during the adoption call.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the I-D authors. Please, submit draft-ietf-*-00 versions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the documents as soon as possible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ dmm mailing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ dmm mailing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmm mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm