Re: [MEXT] FW: Agenda requests for Prague meeting

[marcelo bagnulo braun <[e-mail]>]

El 22/03/11 16:37, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
> Le 22/03/2011 15:52, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>> so, you ave downgraded you statement of several itemS being non MIP
>> related and all the DMM discussion being non MIP related to just one
>> single agenda item...
>
> You asked one, I told one.
>
> Another is the 3rd item (HAC is not a Mobile IPv6 entity, TLS is not a
> MIP6 Type Code, etc.)
>

you mean the presentation of the draft entitled "Negotiation of security 
protocol for Mobile IPv6 operation" which in its 7 pages mentions the 
term Mobile IP over 24 times????, really?




>> great, it seems we are making good progress here.
>>
>> about the particular item you mention: i understand this is the
>> motivation for the dmm work and understanding the perceived probelms
>> is needed to figure out how we can use MIP to deal with the
>> perceived problem.
>>
>>
>> However, if people think this is out of scope for MEXT, i am fine to
>> discuss whether we should keep it in the agenda or not
>
> I think it is worth discussing how much relationship do the current
> agenda items have to the Mobile IPv6 protocol, and whether that
> relationship is as much as other agenda requests.
sure, that is what we are doing, but if your point is that 
draft-patil-mext-sec-negotiate-00.txt is as closely related to the MIPv6 
protocol as IRON, then i am not sure we may be able to find a common 
ground for understanding each other....

Regards, marcelo


>
> Alex
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> El 22/03/11 15:35, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
>>> Le 22/03/2011 15:06, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>>> Please point exactly what item in the agenda is NOT about the
>>>> Mobile IP protocol.
>>>
>>> The 6th.
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> El 20/03/11 15:13, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
>>>>> Marcelo, Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a doubt about the reasoning behind declining Fred's
>>>>> request of agenda item.
>>>>>
>>>>> The current agenda
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/agenda/mext.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> contains items IMHO only remotely or very vaguely related to
>>>>> the Mobile IPv6 protocol per se. Additionally, agenda's DMM
>>>>> core item has a discussion which does not seem to converge on
>>>>> the use of Mobile IPv6.
>>>>>
>>>>> In this sense, I am not sure the typical statements of MEXT
>>>>> doing _only_ Mobile IPv6 stuff holds any longer, as I see it
>>>>> today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fred's "IRON and MOBIKE" draft-templin-ironmike-00.txt is
>>>>> related to IKE which is related to Mobile IPv6 security.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not trying to advertise Fred's draft particularly. I am
>>>>> saying this because...
>>>>>
>>>>> I have the same agenda problem with similar work I do
>>>>> (RA-based routing) for mobility, i.e. boxes which may run
>>>>> Mobile IPv6 but need something else than Mobile IPv6 Type
>>>>> Codes.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is my doubt about MEXT activity and agenda planning,
>>>>> thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 14/03/2011 19:56, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is outside the scope of the MEXT wg, which is limited
>>>>>> to the the Mobile IPv6 protocol. Hence, we decline your
>>>>>> request.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards, marcelo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> El 14/03/11 18:57, Templin, Fred L escribió:
>>>>>>> Hi Marcelo (and Julien),
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In January, I posted several messages on a new approach to
>>>>>>> mobility management known as IRON:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04529.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04535.html
>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04543.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04546.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The base IRON architecture document has now been published
>>>>>>> as an experimental RFC of the IRTF Routing Research Group:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6179.txt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and the mechanisms and operational practices are
>>>>>>> documented in the following active Internet drafts:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-vet
>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-seal
>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-ironmike-00
>>>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-iron-pm-00
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to get a 20min MEXT slot at IETF80 to present the
>>>>>>>  approach. Please let me know if that works for you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fred [e-mail]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: [e-mail]
>>>>>>>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of marcelo
>>>>>>>> bagnulo braun Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 8:32 AM
>>>>>>>> To: mext Subject: [MEXT] Agenda requests for Prague
>>>>>>>> meeting
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please send slot requests for the prague meeting to the
>>>>>>>> chairs. please note that we are meeting on friday.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT
>>>>>>>> mailing list [e-mail]
>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing
>>>>>> list [e-mail]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing
>>>>> list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list
>>>> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list
>>> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list
>> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>