[DMM] MIP and GTP (was Re: regarding the re-chartering..)

[Alper Yegin <[e-mail]>]

Hi Charlie,

GTP has its data-plane (GTP-U) and control-plane (GTP-C).
I think you are talking about using Mobile IP signaling in-place of GTP-C to enable GTP-U.
If so, I think it'd technically work. But, for adoption by 3GPP standards and deployments, we'd need to make a case for using Mobile IP instead of GTP-C. 

Alper


On Sep 5, 2014, at 8:10 PM, Charlie Perkins wrote:

> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> I have made various presentations at IETF, some from many years
> ago, proposing that Mobile IP enable use of GTP as a tunneling
> option.  I still think that would be a good idea.  Should I re-re-revive
> a draft stating this in more detail?
> 
> Regards,
> Charlie P.
> 
> 
> On 9/5/2014 1:48 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
>> Alex,
>> 
>> DMM is not meant to be only about a bunch of MIP-based solutions.
>> There are various components in DMM solution space that'd also work with GTP-based architectures.
>> For example, identifying the mobility needs of flows.
>> Or, conveying the mobility characteristic of a prefix to the UE.
>> 
>> Alper
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 4, 2014, at 1:14 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>> 
>>> Le 03/09/2014 20:53, Brian Haberman a écrit :
>>>> Behcet,
>>>> 
>>>> On 9/3/14 2:33 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>>>>> You don't seem to understand my points.
>>>> That is quite possible.  Your comment on the list was "I am against any
>>>> deployment work before we decide on a solution..."
>>>> 
>>>> I read that as an objection to having the deployment models work item on
>>>> the agenda.  Please do tell me what I am missing.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Brian
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am following the discussion and me too I do not quite understand what is the complain.
>>> 
>>> I am happy to learn that a if a WG is to be formed then it would be around a solution rather than just requirements or architecture.
>>> 
>>> That said, I would like to express a worry along similar lines.
>>> 
>>> In DMM, precedents and the keen NETEXT, there seems to be a hard-rooted disconnect between the product developped - (P)Mobile IP - and the deployments.  We know for a fact that 3GPP deployments (2G/3G/4G) do not use (P)Mobile IP.  We also know that 3GPP specs do mention Mobile IP. To such a point that I wonder whether 3GPP has not the same disconnect as here.
>>> 
>>> On another hand, we do have indications of where (P)Mobile IP is used - the trials, the projects, the kernel code, and not least the slideware attracting real customers.
>>> 
>>> The worry: develop DMM protocol while continuing the disconnect.
>>> 
>>> Alex
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmm mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmm mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>> 
>