Re: [DMM] Comments on draft-patil-dmm-issues-and-approaches2dmm-00

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Pete,

Thanks for your review and comments. Let me come back to you with
responses in the next day or two.

-Raj

On 3/6/12 3:48 PM, "ext Peter McCann" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hi, Raj, Carl, and Jouni,
>
>I have some comments on draft-patil-dmm-issues-and-approaches2dmm-00.
>
>I agree with most of Section 4, "Issues with current mobility models".
>However,
>I'd like to point out that existing networks are not just centralized in
>the manner
>you point out, they also tend to have a hierarchical structure, e.g., the
>S-GW/P-GW split in 3GPP EPC.  Therefore, the issue you outline in Section
>4.3
>("Inefficient Routing and signaling overhead") is not quite true of the
>3GPP
>EPC, which can handle many mobility events in a localized manner similar
>to
>HMIP.
>
>The first paragraph of Section 7 talks about source address selection,
>and the
>need to modify applications so that they request the kind of address that
>they
>want.  I tend to think that applications will remain unmodified for some
>time
>to come; however, most applications fit into the paradigm of opening
>short-lived
>connections to a server and could be accommodated with some sort of
>automatic
>handling in the MN's IP stack.
>
>I found the last paragraph of Section 7 quite interesting.  I too think
>that there
>is an important piece missing that you call "seamless mobility anchor
>relocation".
>I think that the use of an interior routing protocol is spot on.  In
>fact, if you
>read draft-mccann-dmm-flatarch-00, I propose just that.  I think we can
>use such
>an anchor relocation protocol to make each access router in an autonomous
>system
>(or smaller region of an autonomous system) a temporary anchor for a
>given prefix.
>In my draft I propose running I-BGP on each AR and sending BGP UPDATES
>into the
>network upon localized mobility events.  Such a protocol can also be used
>as a
>substitute for the proxy ND technique that is currently specified to
>"grab" the
>MN's packets at the HA.  By using a routing protocol, the HA can reach
>across
>several routing hops so it doesn't necessarily need to be on the home
>link (which
>can be the first AR to which the MN attached).  I think this would also
>enable us
>to unify the authentication protocols used at the AR with the
>authentication protocol
>used at the HA.  The ARs are just like HAs that don't have to tunnel the
>data anywhere
>because the MN is locally connected.
>
>Does it make sense to you?
>
>--
>Peter J. McCann
>Huawei Technologies (USA)
>[e-mail]
>[phone]
>Rm. C-0105, 400 Crossings Blvd. (2nd floor), Bridgewater, NJ  08807-2863
>USA
>
>