Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group
jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Thu, 03 November 2011 21:02 UTC
Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5CAC1F0C6F for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mPq92Pk0zV4U for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:02:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8F31F0C35 for <mext@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:02:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by faas12 with SMTP id s12so2378024faa.31 for <mext@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=FVNh4L/y94VJAxnnI0LdgYYPGSQMwGkzDbakeD9pUxM=; b=pllQzkRqmrBhS32Gqqfz4PJWQ+9bcWM/ZqW2PF1c2y6yjEWy8LCsSBMjCG161bA8US mSfnUukYYSgCA7x4rIn+iLgyqt7xahx7uMPjeGl5rfkJilCADrqAToc1kHfrma7YEIKq fJwCBZ7zTxas5umWzu1PRulkFoswYNrRAPlgo=
Received: by 10.223.39.20 with SMTP id d20mr18703711fae.37.1320354168476; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.7.154] (dsl-64-34.utaonline.at. [81.189.64.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d21sm14008903fac.4.2011.11.03.14.02.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:02:47 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4EB2D421.4030905@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 23:02:42 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2326342E-97CA-4BD3-B704-F610FCB04C87@gmail.com>
References: <4EAA9B4A.3020208@piuha.net> <4EB2D421.4030905@earthlink.net>
To: "Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: jouni.korhonen@nsn.com, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, mext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 21:02:50 -0000
Charlie, It was 2005, a warm May week in Athens when SA2, RAN2 and RAN3 had a meeting., and EPS took its first steps.. This, for example, was on a table: http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_sa/WG2_Arch/TSGS2_46_Athens/Docs/S2-051260.zip That did/does not too bad actually. I still remember some operator folk standing up back then and giving a loud comment "This science fiction.." ;-) - Jouni On Nov 3, 2011, at 7:49 PM, Charles E. Perkins wrote: > Hello folks, > > For several years now, I have been studying 4G wireless > network architecture and wondering why there is such a > disconnect between, say, LTE mobility management and > IETF mobility management. Mobile IP has a secondary > role, to say the least. IETF approaches may be seen to > have several inadequacies, and 3GPP approaches also show > some major problems. I think that it is important for > the IETF to devote some serious effort towards bringing > these two worlds together, because current directions > are leading towards an impossibly baroque, wasteful, > nearly impenetrable mess of complication. The effects > overall is loss of performance and opportunity. > > Taking a look at S101 and S103, we can immediately > recognize that they are drastically more complicated, > restrictive, and operationally more expensive than > Mobile IP. Taking a look at S102, we immediately see > that 3GPP mobility management threatens to be different > for each class of application, with an unnecessary > per-application proliferation of servers, protocol, > permissions, traffic controls, configuration, and so on. > Taking a look at recent efforts towards WiFi offload, > we see the same trend of complication and software > hacks that could be avoided with proper IETF > approaches. > > On the IETF side, we should specify: > - Integrated authentication for access control > as well as IP address continuity > - Location-assisted handovers (think MIIS / ANDSF) > - Modular/alternative security > - Signaling on control plane, user traffic on > data plane > - Alternative tunneling (GTP is simply not going > to die a quick death, to say the least) > - geez, the list does go on, but no one reads > long lists ... > ... > > I don't know if we already have 3GPP liaison, but > if we do the communication channels don't seem to > have had very much effect within the [mext] work > lately. > > My fear is that if we don't take action, we are > choosing a future that is ever more complicated, > non-extendible, non-flexible, radio technology > specific, application specific, and bug-ridden. > In short, everything we don't want the Internet > to be. And, I am sure no one here doubts that > the Internet of the future is all high-speed > wireless. Where is the IETF going to be? > > If the [mext] working group is shut down, there > is no natural place for this work to happen. > Therefore, I hope that [mext] would NOT shut > down, and instead recharter to tackle these > urgent problems. > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > > > On 10/28/2011 5:08 AM, Jari Arkko wrote: >> All, >> >> We are making some changes to the working group. While we have >> successfully published a large number of specifications in recent years, >> recently it has been difficult to make progress in the group. The chairs >> and ADs have looked at the situation and we believe we need a new focus >> and a bit of new organization as well. We are terminating the working >> group and moving the one remaining active work item to a new working >> group, the "DMM" working group. Here's what is going to happen: >> >> o Jouni Korhonen and Julien Laganier will become the chairs of the group. >> >> o The group will meet in Taipei (there is a MEXT slot in the agenda). >> >> o The charter of the group will be changed to focus only on the >> distributed mobility effort. We should discuss the details of this >> charter change both on the list and in the meeting. The meeting agenda >> should reserve some time both for technical discussions as well as the >> charter discussion. >> >> o Once the discussion on the list and in the meeting has finished, we >> will rename the group to "DMM" and put the new charter in effect. >> >> o If there are any other specifications that people would like to >> publish beyond the distributed mobility work, we can offer to AD sponsor >> them to RFCs outside the new working group. If there is some significant >> new activity, we can create new working groups for that. >> >> Comments and feedback and/or alternate suggestions on this plan are >> welcome. >> >> We would like to thank Marcelo for your many years of service in MEXT. >> We could not have completed all the work we did without your energy and >> push for high quality results. We would also like to thank Jouni for >> taking on this new challenge, and Julien for continuing the work in this >> space. >> >> Jari and Ralph >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MEXT mailing list >> MEXT@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext >> > > _______________________________________________ > MEXT mailing list > MEXT@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Jari Arkko
- [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Jari Arkko
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hui Deng
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hui Deng
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Ryuji Wakikawa
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Jari Arkko
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Julien Laganier
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Jari Arkko
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Ryuji Wakikawa
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group pierrick.seite
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Thierry Ernst
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group jouni korhonen
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group jouni korhonen
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Pete McCann
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group jouni korhonen
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group pierrick.seite
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group jouni korhonen
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group pierrick.seite
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group liu dapeng
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Pete McCann
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group jouni korhonen
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item (was: the futu… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item Thierry Ernst
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group pierrick.seite
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item karagian
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item Dirk.von-Hugo
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [MEXT] automotive reqs WG item Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hidetoshi Yokota
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Charles E. Perkins
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hidetoshi Yokota
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group liu dapeng
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group liu dapeng
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group jouni korhonen
- Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group h chan