[DMM] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-22 (Ends 2025-10-30)

[Satoru Matsushima <[e-mail]>]

DMMer,

Let me remind you that the mobility-aware transport draft is now in WGLC.
It will end on Oct. 30, so please review the draft.
You can use this thread to send your feedback.

Cheers,
--satoru

On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 9:09 PM Satoru Matsushima via Datatracker <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-22 (Ends
> 2025-10-30)
>
> This message starts a 2-week WG Last Call for this document.
>
> Abstract:
>    Network slicing in 5G enables logical networks for communication
>    services of multiple 5G customers to be multiplexed over the same
>    infrastructure.  While 5G slicing covers logical separation of
>    various aspects of 5G infrastructure and services, user's data plane
>    packets over the Radio Access Network (RAN) and Core Network (5GC)
>    use IP in many segments of an end-to-end 5G slice.  When end-to-end
>    slices in a 5G System use network resources, they are mapped to
>    corresponding IP transport network slice(s) which in turn provide the
>    bandwidth, latency, isolation, and other criteria required for the
>    realization of a 5G slice.
>
>    This document describes mapping of 5G slices to transport network
>    slices using UDP source port number of the GTP-U bearer when the IP
>    transport network (slice provider) is separated by an "attachment
>    circuit" from the networks in which the 5G network functions are
>    deployed, for example, 5G functions that are distributed across data
>    centers.  The slice mapping defined here is supported transparently
>    when a 5G user device moves across 5G attachment points and session
>    anchors.
>
> File can be retrieved from:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-tn-aware-mobility/
>
> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping
> [e-mail]
> in copy. Objections should be motivated and suggestions to resolve them are
> highly appreciated.
>
> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded again of the
> Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP
> 79
> [1]. Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of
> any. Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy
> can
> be found at [3].
>
> Thank you.
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
>
>
>
>