Re: [Ila] [E] Re: review comments on ] draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-00.txt

[Satoru Matsushima <[e-mail]>]

Hello Kalyani,

> 
> When you see UPF specifically it should be controlled by SMF through N4, they are not the UPFs.
> But you might see them as UPFs if a SMF doesn’t control them directly but the SMF can put the sessions to it through some other means.
> 3GPP SA2 has studied on that case (ETSUN). We consider how SMF deal with that case and SRv6 may help to solve the issues to it in simpler way.
> Please let me know if you are interested in.
> [KB] is there a TR for ETSUN that I can read?

You can read it later on this September. See https://portal.3gpp.org/ngppapp/CreateTdoc.aspx?mode=view&contributionUid=SP-170743


> 
> [KB] I think your document needs to separate out 3 architectures: one for 4G - SGW/PGW; one for 4G - CUPS; and one for 5G - UPF.

If you mean SRv6 Mobile Uplane draft, it is already a WG document, not my draft. So I’d collect opinions on this from WG. I’m sorry for that.
As a co-author of the draft, I’m afraid I disagree. SRv6 Mobile Uplane draft specifies SRv6 functions for mobile user plane, which should be architecture agnostic.


> 
> [KB] I am also still not clear if the blue icons (which I think represent IP/MPLS nodes) in your slides are included in SRv6 architecture or not.

I put some text what those icons indicate. Please find them in the slides. The blue icons represent IPv6 or SRv6 node.

Cheers,
--satoru