Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)

["Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Satoru,

Please see zzh> below.



Juniper Business Use Only
From: dmm <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Satoru Matsushima
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 4:08 AM
To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang=[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

Hi Jeffrey, Tianji,

Your draft says:

   This document is not an attempt to do 3GPP work in IETF.  Rather, it
   discusses potential integration of IETF/wireline and 3GPP/wireless
   technologies - first among parties who are familiar with both areas
   and friendly with IETF/wireline technologies.  If the ideas in this
   document are deemed reasonable, feasible and desired among these
   parties, they can then be brought to 3GPP for further discussions.

What I extracted from the above text is that you won't do any substantial standardization work in DMM/IETF about the contents described in your draft, since IETF is not a  right venue for that. And you will go to 3GPP with your supporters.

Zzh> Indeed. There is no standardization to be done in IETF. It is an informational document that discusses the proposal and many relevant aspects, which could be very valuable input to 3GPP.

If it is correct, I'm not clear on what "WG adoption" means here. In case that this is an informational document composed by you, however no further substantial work could be expected, do we really need "WG adoption"? or do you need WG adoption to go 3GPP? If so, what is the reason behind it?
Zzh> We don’t need WG adoption to go to 3GPP, but it is good to have an informational WG document (and eventually an informational RFC) for two purposes:
Zzh> a) to document the (rough) consensus that this is a reasonable/natural user plane evolution.
Zzh> b) to provide this to 3GPP as input when sought (more below).
Let me share an experience between 3GPP in the past. A substantial uplane protocol work had been initiated in DMM, and then 3GPP (CT WG4) started a study for user plane protocol and a liaison between DMM was initiated by 3GPP. I think that way would be a case where we inform 3GPP one of our WG documents, but that itself would not be the goal for that work.
Zzh> Similar approach will be taken. A 3GPP study will be initiated by 3GPP delegates who agree with this ANUP approach. They will point out the existence of the DMM informational document as input. Neither party needs to initiate an official liaison, but if 3GPP does, we can respond with this document. During the progress of our draft, we could also initiate a liaison to invite comments from 3GPP.
Could you elaborate if we really need adoption, and what will you do in DMM after the adoption.
Zzh> As explained above, we believe it is important and valuable to adopt this document:
Zzh> a) The adoption process itself may trigger further discussions that will improve the proposal and the document.
Zzh> b) It’s good to have an official draft to document the proposal and (rough) consensus among IETF/DMM, whether the proposal will be accepted in 3GPP or not.
Zzh> c) The official document will be available as input to 3GPP if/when they do their study.
Zzh> After adoption we’ll continue to enhance the proposal and improve the document (e.g. discuss and document more topics/issues that may be raised, like what we did all along) until it is ready to become an informational RFC.
Zzh> Thanks!
Zzh> Jeffrey
--satoru


On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 5:35 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi,

Thanks, Tianji for presenting in IETF117 and requesting adoption in the presentation and here.

As a co-author, I obviously agree with what Tianji said here and want to see it adopted. I am sure other co-authors share the same view even though they did not explicitly echo “agree/support as co-author” 😊

We appreciate that DMM provided a venue for us to discuss/present the topic/updates and gather input and supporters. We believe all the issues that were brought up have been sufficiently discussed and addressed in the draft, and we have not seen objections to the proposal, so it is appropriate to adopt this informational draft as a WG document. The adoption process, and work on the document by the WG after adoption will improve it further.

Hopefully, people are coming back from their vacations and will speak up their thoughts.

Thanks.
Jeffrey




Juniper Business Use Only
From: dmm <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> On Behalf Of Tianji Jiang
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 6:16 PM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution)

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

Dear DMM Team:

During the IETF-117, we have presented and discussed our IETF draft: ‘Mobile User Plane Evolution’ (draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!EK_rpxFyiyc83DZJzh4RPbd0YkJPuxR3_9ox2_KhDo9ABaUZGfBEa9juMF9q91PN0_pEPjdFxcZCKY8JwZvouq1rNQ$> ). In the presentation, we explained the fundamental ideas of the I.D., along with our objectives. As we have stated, this was the 6th iteration of the I.D. Including this time (of IETF-117), different versions of the drafts have been presented & discussed thru the IETF-114, -115, -116 & -117.

At the moment, we believe we have covered sufficiently various aspects of the MUP-evolution, i.e., the potential integration of gNB & UPF with targeting at B5G & 6G. These are comprised of both IP-domain requirements & wireless technologies. Further, as of now,

  *   The 3GPP 4G LIPA work, i.e., the Local IP Access, bodes well for our (B5G, 6G) ‘ANUP-like’ proposal.
  *   The 3GPP Rel-19 planning (5G) is on-going and some potential work (of the I.D.) could be possibly brought it to 3GPP for further study (Rel-19); and
  *   The 3GPP Rel-20 (6G roadmap) targets toward the beginning of Y-2025, which is a perfect timing for exploration and adoption of the ANUP-like work.

Given all the work that have been done so far, we have, during the IETF-117 DMM session, initiated a possible adoption-call of the I.D., in the ‘informational’ track. We have emphasized our I.D. just serves as input to 3GPP and we don’t intend to do 3GPP work in the IETF community. For a procedural question from an on-site attendee of the DMM session, the 3GPP-to-IETF liaison manager has shared his opinion and said there is no problem to bring the ‘normal document’ to 3GPP for discussion/reference.

At the end of the session, the DMM chair suggested we bring this draft to the email alias. So, we are here to officially initiate the adoption-call of our I.D.
Team, please share your opinions, comments, questions, etc. Thank you.

BR,

-Tianji


_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HBafPblWXEZFMgGyumCPEX-t_wyouJQF0MP9d6oI8y6k2wckkea0QrFZdqYRqm-c8lIodnz3ydipwdRgjA3U5nfYjYY$>