Re: [DMM] Call for adoption of draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02 as DMM WG document

Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com> Mon, 17 December 2018 09:19 UTC

Return-Path: <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AEB128CE4 for <dmm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 01:19:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xRZ3fQdK-m_E for <dmm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 01:19:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x632.google.com (mail-pl1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F283E128BCC for <dmm@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 01:19:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x632.google.com with SMTP id g9so5840245plo.3 for <dmm@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 01:19:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ojiT6Mt18eAAJp0NitnVBfhlfC0xOYyn4hLybr40NMA=; b=HcjXwko7LTiAQdK8fnibUwJxSTjNEBdU2IYT4dSzTes+taTWpWap6pEEZFznopDA7V NVeiP1NlvHUsjpYp3Bp0KkRhIg+6cGdO1JFTymwma8sqVoqa0zQnMzjUKi6d7kiLfIeU ImH/D4z+HJtTJNB6RqRMSbX4RlklCXrH3i5M7E+ntFYweGSS5xAl0Px6Fb6aXTT+Ks63 D66aXGBmpXwowVm7N/G9kuCxqj5FCB+YSdqCSazm5qu1hb8x+5hsD0McjKY6kqIPBdP4 yi3JaALombJCgSs+cW4A51v0/xYB1UpUBPUc5TLpceXrvduApKiSeCtuC7mhiNBVdv2B JL6w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ojiT6Mt18eAAJp0NitnVBfhlfC0xOYyn4hLybr40NMA=; b=aHLxuUkKF1m5B5/jLKz9OZ1DNj4a58zt5RXtgz3BxRmv+JV+MIgrERoHjvy1XMiBc4 gsPcasAOYwEcSPVeu/oqHODpDLl4DsLBNT/nK3xrqBsIkqjPaEpbdFeH3SP63rlcCiMV lMxqt7q/1KDI9D2XB2ohcr5ptAdvjUThC5iT95yt+naVsi+a9lklDIpz7+z3G1KdGtqQ s5an7hYX29gyJodnBLwyq1873xePwLsvOUORu1MnSvfl++UI7fD72jYVpW/YQRcLpdlv OkIOqmBlGQnFloYRnr9HXTsVEl4Tum8AvM4xGMfUl+9OYGfXWOPOVLtB1iT2Wh73yOEb Cufg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWYDesMg3frPvTiDfsNGYI8Zq6HpuHFwLeCUFkGfCxRrLoJ5XZVH ApeCNOGw43WM7iE7l7DMzwox3XMD
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/VjQCboVgDiiW8rM2FZN0s2ZIrdwg71OWi6g6rqGvl9X9vgd2wwynkerch4twJ4J3hYQoUrDA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6946:: with SMTP id k6mr12318423plt.101.1545038372769; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 01:19:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.160.40] (ag019059.dynamic.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp. [157.107.19.59]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x127sm17595791pfd.156.2018.12.17.01.19.30 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Dec 2018 01:19:31 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D8388995.2E0FF2%sgundave@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 18:19:28 +0900
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <381BB175-A810-42B8-9EE8-8D62E7E86E83@gmail.com>
References: <D8242158.2DFB2F%sgundave@cisco.com> <D82D483F.2E04E4%sgundave@cisco.com> <D8388995.2E0FF2%sgundave@cisco.com>
To: "dmm@ietf.org" <dmm@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmm/9w6CmPYaTcmyTkLxnPQpFmNWIbM>
Subject: Re: [DMM] Call for adoption of draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02 as DMM WG document
X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group <dmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmm/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:19:37 -0000

Thank you Sri, and all,

During that, let me make clear some questions and comments. First one:

> So the purpose of this draft seems to explicitly be to do work for 3GPP that they have explicitly said they DO NOT WANT.

It’s wrong. In the LS of CP-173160 requested any information regarding user plane. So please re-read the following:

> 2. Actions:
> To IETF DMM:
> ACTION:         CT4 respectfully asks IETF DMM to provide any information that may be relevant to the above CT4 work by July 2018.
> 

And the LS of C4-185491 didn’t say they don’t want. It just said that the evaluation criteria for the user plane protocol study (FS_UPPS) in 5GC shall be defined by 3GPP CT4. It should be very natural and responsible.

Second one is that:

> Particularly the discussion around slicing is very speculative. And conclusion thereof that “The expected evaluation points from this aspect should be whether the candidate protocols can support to indicate a network slice in the UP packets.” Firstly, IETF doesn’t have any work on slicing, on the contrary. Secondly, the need for such indication in the 3GPP has been discussed in the ongoing 3GPP CT4 meeting this week with fully opposing views for such network slice indication. (Network slicing is supported in 3GPP Rel-15 already, and nothing new was defined in the user plane in Rel-15. There was no need for that!)

It looks not accurate view of the latest discussion in 3GPP CT4. CT4 agreed not to introduce any NEW identifiers to indicate network slice for 5GC and its transport. Existing identifiers can be expected for that purpose in user plane.


Hope it helps our understanding correct.

Best regards,
--satoru




> 2018/12/14 15:14、Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <sgundave@cisco.com>のメール:
> 
> Folks – Sorry for the delay on this. Given the number of support votes for the company I am affiliated with, I thought it would be best for my co-chair Dapeng reviews this feedback, and in consultation with the AD, makes the decision on this. We will close it soon. 
> 
> Sri
> 
> 
> 
> From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
> Date: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 9:18 AM
> To: "dmm@ietf.org" <dmm@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [DMM] Call for adoption of draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02 as DMM WG document
> 
> Thanks for all the feedback. The adoption call is now closed. We will review the feedback and decide on the next steps.
> 
> Sri
> 
> 
> 
> From: dmm <dmm-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
> Date: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 10:42 AM
> To: "dmm@ietf.org" <dmm@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [DMM] Call for adoption of draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02 as DMM WG document
> 
> Gentle reminder.  The below adoption call will close next week, the 4th of December, 2018. Please provide your feedback. 
> 
> 
> Sri
> 
> 
> 
> From: dmm <dmm-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
> Date: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 4:34 PM
> To: "dmm@ietf.org" <dmm@ietf.org>
> Subject: [DMM] Call for adoption of draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02 as DMM WG document
> 
> Folks:
> 
> During IETF 102 and 103, the authors of the document, draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis.txt have provided the overview of this document. The chairs felt there is good amount of work that went into the document and the analysis has value. The document quality is very high. There was also generally good feedback and interest for the work from the community. We are therefore considering adopting this document as a DMM WG document, to be moved on Informational Standards track.  
> 
> There were also few concerns/comments on the 1.) Relevance of this document to 3GPP in the immediate time frame 2.) Archival Value of the document 3.) Target Audience  - IETF or 3GPP. 
> On #3, there was also a view that the document should be restructured to make it IETF focussed.  With this background, we would like to ask the WG to provide some feedback on their interest for this work. Please provide substantial comments as why this should be adopted, or why it should not be adopted. If there is interest, and if there are no other concerns from AD/IESG/Others, then we may take up this work at some point. 
> 
> Draft Pointer: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hmm-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02
> 
> 
> The adoption call will end on 4th of December, 2019.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Dapping & Sri
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> dmm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm