Re: [mif] WG LC for MIF PS

<pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com> Thu, 25 March 2010 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com>
X-Original-To: mif@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E7753A67F0 for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.118
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
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 uWM1Zd+BSzrL for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 842FF3A67E7 for <mif@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.1]) by omfedm12.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 41B2F24894D; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:07:11 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 25DEB35C055; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:07:11 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:07:11 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:07:08 +0100
Message-ID: <19748_1269482831_4BAAC54F_19748_33307_1_843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C462BFD746@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr>
In-Reply-To: <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1C6AA568CD@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [mif] WG LC for MIF PS
Thread-Index: AcrLDtre4PYEkNOmStSymKL3UelGmwAYqB8AAAVducAADjrN4A==
References: <COL118-W43D1A92D6FAECE336508C6B1310@phx.gbl><BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1C6AA5685C@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com> <4BA99C25.8090504@viagenie.ca> <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C462BFD6B6@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1C6AA568CD@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>
From: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com
To: julienl@qualcomm.com, marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2010 02:07:11.0906 (UTC) FILETIME=[E1AFB020:01CACBBF]
X-PMX-Version: 5.5.7.378829, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2010.3.25.10934
Cc: denghui02@hotmail.com, mif@ietf.org, draft-cao-mif-analysis@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mif] WG LC for MIF PS
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 02:06:53 -0000

We are on the same page :-)

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Laganier, Julien [mailto:julienl@qualcomm.com]
> Envoyé : mercredi 24 mars 2010 20:24
> À : SEITE Pierrick RD-RESA-REN; marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca
> Cc : mif@ietf.org; denghui02@hotmail.com; draft-cao-mif-
> analysis@tools.ietf.org
> Objet : RE: [mif] WG LC for MIF PS
> 
> A connection manager is just one particular instance of an entity that
> performs domain selection, and the proliferation of connection managers on
> a single host illustrates the challenges involved with multiple policies
> on domain selection playing simultaneously.
> 
> So the two missing in points in the draft are 1) issues with domain
> selection, and 2) issues with different policies for domain selection
> being provisioned by different actors, e.g., end-user, corporate IT admin,
> ISP, operator.
> 
> I believe these are spelled out in [1]
> 
> --julien
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com [mailto:pierrick.seite@orange-
> > ftgroup.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:58 AM
> > To: marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca; Laganier, Julien
> > Cc: mif@ietf.org; denghui02@hotmail.com; draft-cao-mif-
> > analysis@tools.ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [mif] WG LC for MIF PS
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > From my understanding:
> >
> > The PS does not describe the problem when a terminal supports multiple
> > connection managers. I agree this is an issue and this problem will be
> > added.
> >
> > Document [1] considers domain selection issue. Actually, I think we are
> > inline here: the PS covers that problem with connection manager
> > considerations (the PS considers domain selection as a task of the
> > connection manager).
> >
> > Julien, if I missed something, do not hesitate to correct me.
> >
> > Pierrick
> >
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : mif-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mif-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de
> > Marc
> > > Blanchet
> > > Envoyé : mercredi 24 mars 2010 05:59
> > > À : Laganier, Julien
> > > Cc : mif@ietf.org; Hui Deng; draft-cao-mif-analysis@tools.ietf.org
> > > Objet : Re: [mif] WG LC for MIF PS
> > >
> > > Laganier, Julien a écrit :
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > >
> > > Julien, is there any way you can be more specific in what is missing?
> > >
> > > Marc.
> > >
> > > > Some of us have put together a draft to begin working on the MIF
> > Current
> > > Practice Analysis [1]. As a starting point to the analysis, we have
> > re-
> > > classified / expanded on the problems listed in earlier version of
> > the
> > > problem statement, and communicated that to the authors. Some of our
> > > comments were integrated in the last PS draft, but not all.
> > > >
> > > > So my comment towards WGLC is that I'd like the full problem list
> > > documented in our draft [1] to be incorporated into the MIF PS. If we
> > > can't agree to do that, I'd like to discuss a bit more why some of
> > the
> > > problems listed in our drafts were not considered valid.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > --julien
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cao-mif-analysis-00
> > > >
> > > > Hui Deng wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> We appear ready to start the working group last call for our PS
> > > documents.
> > > >> This is a two-week WGLC.
> > > >> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-mif-problem-statement-02.txt
> > > >>
> > > >> This is a two week WGLC finishing on March 26.  Please send
> > substantive
> > > >> review comments to mif@ietf.org
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> -Hui
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > mif mailing list
> > > > mif@ietf.org
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > =========
> > > IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
> > > Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
> > > DTN news service: http://reeves.viagenie.ca
> > > NAT64-DNS64 Opensource: http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mif mailing list
> > > mif@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

*********************************
This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and intended solely for the addressees. 
Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited.
Messages are susceptible to alteration. 
France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified.
If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel it immediately and inform the sender.
********************************