Re: [DMM] DMM solution space categorization

[Jouni Korhonen <[e-mail]>]

And then there is the "Distributed mobility management deployment models 
and scenarios":

   draft-liu-dmm-deployment-scenario

Forgot that.. sprry.

- Jouni



7/20/2014 10:06 PM, Jouni Korhonen kirjoitti:
>
> Alper,
>
> Thanks for doing the categorization work. We should also try to look
> these how they fit under the proposed new milestones. See below:
>
>
> 7/19/2014 11:44 AM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
>> *
>> *
>>
>> I've updated the list with the I-Ds suggested by Behcet/Fred/Jouni.
>>
>> Please see below for my opinions about how each category relates to the
>> overall work.
>> Comments welcome.
>> *
>> *
>> *
>> *
>> *1. Per-flow IP address configuration according to mobility needs*
>
> "Exposing mobility state to mobile nodes and network nodes"
>
>> Apps indicating their mobility needs to the IP stack on the MN, and
>> associated IP configuration signaling between the MN and the network.
>>
>> draft-bhandari-dhc-class-based-prefix-03
>> draft-korhonen-dmm-prefix-properties-00.txt
>> draft-yegin-dmm-ondemand-mobility-02
>
> Then we have a number of I-Ds from MIF:
>
>   draft-kk-mpvd-ndp-support
>   draft-kkb-mpvd-dhcp-support
>   draft-kkbg-mpvd-id
>
> These intend to build the overall method of conveying the signaling
> between the network and the mn. There are no spacific use cases
> described for mobility yet but those are then amendments for the above.
>
>   draft-liu-dmm-mobility-api
>
> Above has extensions to RFC5014 for applications to check prefix
> properties.
>
>
>> This category is essential, given that we all agree mobility will be
>> treated on a per-flow basis.
>> (and once we dive into the category, I'd say the aforementioned I-Ds are
>> complementary).
>>
>>
>>
>> *2. Mobility solution selection *
>
> In my optinion this also fits under "Exposing mobility state to mobile
> nodes and network nodes".
>
>> MN determining the type of mobility solution(s) it'd apply to a given
>> flow.
>>
>> draft-yegin-ip-mobility-orchestrator-00
>>
>> In recognition of L4+ mobility solutions (such as MPTCP, SIP, apps
>> having their own), this also becomes essential for a DMM solution. Some
>> people may argue, discussion is very welcome.
>>
>>
>>
>> *3. IP anchor selection*
>
> "Enhanced mobility anchoring"
>
>> MN selecting the IP anchor node after it decides to use IP anchoring
>> (whether in the access network or the core network).
>>
>> draft-aliahmad-dmm-anchor-selection-00.txt
>>
>> This category is supporting the Category 4, 5 and 6. This is about more
>> intelligent way of picking the IP anchor once the type of anchor is
>> determined.
>> This may produce a standalone I-D, or may be folded into individual
>> solutions in those categories.
>>
>>
>> *4. Access network anchoring*
>
> Still related to "Enhanced mobility anchoring". Many of these I-Ds
> handle the anchor change issues (like tunneling between the anchors).
>
>> Anchoring IP address within the access network using IP-in-IP tunneling.
>>
>> draft-bernardos-dmm-cmip-01
>> draft-bernardos-dmm-pmip-03
>> draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed-anchoring-04
>> draft-chan-dmm-enhanced-mobility-anchoring-00
>> draft-sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi-00.txt
>> draft-seite-dmm-dma-07.txt
>> draft-xuan-dmm-nemo-dmm-02.txt
>> draft-korhonen-dmm-local-prefix-01
>>
>> The need for this category is well-understood. The challenge is having
>> plethora of solutions. Though the main concept is common…
>>
>>
>> *5. Corresponding node/network anchoring*
>
> Still under "Enhanced mobility anchoring".
>
>> Anchoring IP address on the Corresponding Node or Corresponding Network.
>>
>> Mobile IPv6 route optimization
>> draft-yegin-dmm-cnet-homing-02
>> draft-xiong-dmm-ip-reachability-01
>> draft-templin-aerolink-29
>>
>> This category of solutions are also needed (for their ability to produce
>> better paths and different applicability with respect to the Category 4)
>>
>>
>> *6. Host-route based intra-domain solutions*
>
> "Forwarding path and signalling management"
>
>> Non-tunneling solutions.
>>
>> draft-chan-dmm-enhanced-mobility-anchoring-00
>> draft-matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-02
>> draft-mccann-dmm-flatarch-00
>> draft-sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi-00.txt
>>
>> Solutions in this category are competing with the Category 4 type
>> solutions. There are various pros and cons. IMHO, we cannot resolve that
>> contest, hence we should produce solution for both categories and let
>> the industry pick and choose. Given that these solutions are isolated
>> from the other components (categories), standardizing both should not
>> have adverse impact on the overall DMM complexity.
>>
>> Alper
>
> - JOuni
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>