Re: [MEXT] Mobile IPv6 label and Mobile IPv6 protocol changes (was: FW: Agenda requests for Prague meeting)

Julien Laganier <julien.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 22 March 2011 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <julien.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0599928C170 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:27:14 -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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B-rVyJrl7uYF for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F40FD28C13D for <mext@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:27:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyb42 with SMTP id 42so7887219wyb.31 for <mext@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=w+g6ljfuahNLj9n5VLeKVEoKPOjAw65vI0wmocVa+og=; b=TJsTjmxgVpRtHQW2I+/A/yyrHlANRuc28tZ8RPf6cBGAhX7nelJ8/uKmf3aMdC5gCh lm6/9uPZSSGkglJTmNoiZ/4hfV36S5zjwi4uDKLwgSpD/vjVrc/QjmoyAvaDnNV/kI8u a/p/XdeBjha+xsyq1YlM+URmt/JO2OIPkU9Ic=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dPBvD6LxlwHjpg4HuLahikriqI8ADICTYPLLTPoQtRMqbgRz4uNV85BmygPCtO21dB eb18pGuiLYmVTJo13BsWIvcy6pC8k1K39iOlDrdHAfFjnMK25eDHxNFi1zPDEt/BjYAB vzVOybUCC03ZIO8KelJ+YesdosuCkIMbmbKFs=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.60.193 with SMTP id u43mr6523472wec.103.1300825723623; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.89.205 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4D88FC52.4090309@gmail.com>
References: <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65C69021B3A@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com> <4D7E64EE.5030302@it.uc3m.es> <4D860B93.4030602@gmail.com> <4D88ACE6.6030207@it.uc3m.es> <4D88B3A5.7050302@gmail.com> <4D88B7B5.4020903@it.uc3m.es> <4D88C23B.4020709@gmail.com> <4D88D22D.300@it.uc3m.es> <4D88FC52.4090309@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:28:43 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimP84zss62OuTddFGLgDd5GAw1M7ctZh+Nxbkmj@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julien Laganier <julien.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: mext <mext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MEXT] Mobile IPv6 label and Mobile IPv6 protocol changes (was: FW: Agenda requests for Prague meeting)
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:27:14 -0000

Alex:

What is your point? You're not happy with the agenda? Please be specific.

--julien

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Alexandru Petrescu
<alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 22/03/2011 17:45, marcelo bagnulo braun a écrit :
>>
>> 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?
>
> Yes, I meant so, and here is why.
>
> If I understand it correctly, HAC seems to be a new box with two
> distinctive parts: one running a non-Mobile IP protocol (TLS tunnelled
> Req/Resp, i.e. non Mobile IPv6) and another part which runs pure Mobile
> IPv6 (BU/BAck).
>
> Me too: my draft's MR has two distinctive parts: one running a
> non-Mobile IP protocol (ICMPv6 extensions for prefixes, i.e. non Mobile
> IPv6) and another part which runs pure Mobile IPv6 (BU/BAck with NEMOv6)
> ("MR" is all over the draft and its definition is that it runs Mobile
> IPv6 with NEMOv6.)
>
> (On another hand, e.g. draft-hampel-mext-ro-without-ha-00, another
> agenda item, seems indeed to be modifications to the Mobile IPv6
> protocol (new HoA Support Mobility Option in Mobility Header).  That
> seems more appropriate to the MEXT agenda if MEXT is defined as being
> Mobile IPv6-only work.)
>
> That is why I think some items seem little appropriate to the agenda.
>
> Or maybe MEXT is not only about modifications to Mobile IPv6 but it is
> also something else, at which point more agenda items should be accepted
> in all fairness.
>
>>>> 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....
>
> I am trying to understand this.
>
> I look at ironmike (IRON and MOBIKE) and it reads like using IKE for
> supporting mobile nodes changing their addresses.  I think it could be
> used together with Mobile IPv6: use MOBIKE mobility when in an IRON
> domain or otherwise use Mobile IPv6 when handing over to the
> non-IRON parts of Internet.
>
> (I read "IRON tradespace" as I read "SDO")
>
> I may not understand ironmike correctly, I just suppose.
>
> IMHO.
>
> Alex
> [*] draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01
>>
>> 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 fred.l.templin@boeing.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From:
>>>>>>>>>> mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org]
>>>>>>>>>>  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 MEXT@ietf.org
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ 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
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ 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
>