Re: [MEXT] the future of the MEXT working group
"Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net> Thu, 03 November 2011 22:29 UTC
Return-Path: <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
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 A558911E80BD for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:29:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.952
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.952 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.647, BAYES_00=-2.599, FB_WORD2_END_DOLLAR=3.294]
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 ZgIXsgZfiNOG for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D1B11E80C2 for <mext@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=tWI2O2xG5nkNDrjt5AIv8gpIVZ7bIpczLhImUoNYfBX26R9UHGfHi2PcM9CP9D/+; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [138.111.58.2] (helo=[172.17.96.136]) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>) id 1RM5mx-00044j-Dq; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 18:29:35 -0400
Message-ID: <4EB315CA.70300@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:29:30 -0700
From: "Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
Organization: Wichorus Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
References: <4EAA9B4A.3020208@piuha.net> <4EB2D421.4030905@earthlink.net> <2326342E-97CA-4BD3-B704-F610FCB04C87@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2326342E-97CA-4BD3-B704-F610FCB04C87@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 137d7d78656ed6919973fd6a8f21c4f2d780f4a490ca6956d5d4673fe7faad8685bf80a9a271e3ab02b3df5df8ddffe0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 138.111.58.2
Cc: 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 22:29:39 -0000
Hello Jouni, I think S2-051260 is an outstanding design document that everyone in [mext] should read. From it, we "SHOULD" have seen a much better designed system. The result, however, would not be recognizable from figure 1 and figure 2 except by a quite optimistic LTE expert. I started to think about how to quantify the huge jump in complexity between the stated design goals in the document and the result of S1 --> S$\infty$ but my head started to hurt... never mind Ga --> Gz and the 200 IEs for GTP, and all the other modules. Is it possible to have some discussion on my proposal [i.e., "On the IETF side, we should specify: ..."] at IETF 82? I realize it is quite broad and would probably engender a lot of discussion, but it's a discussion that needs to happen. Regards, Charlie P. On 11/3/2011 2:02 PM, jouni korhonen wrote: > 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