IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] MIF API - Access Network Selection

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 02 August 2012 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA57511E81B6 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 H1LMSojAL50K for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og126.obsmtp.com (exprod7og126.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAF7711E81B2 for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob126.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUBq83Tjc4Ie/uHq+WgSpcoIRMZi2VnSj@postini.com; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:46:07 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D1F1B830C for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDAFB190060; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:46:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:46:04 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: "<sarikaya@ieee.org>" <sarikaya@ieee.org>, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: MIF API - Access Network Selection
Thread-Index: AQHNcCpCx3vi/hqDfku3VfHWCfpMfZdF6s2AgAADtACAAAk5gIAAuCoAgACMHYCAAAZjAA==
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 17:46:03 +0000
Message-ID: <745F5DFE-6BE1-4321-8D81-D15566EE13AD@nominum.com>
References: <CAC8QAccpQTO2u2z00r-s_hc_bA+usFKnHN-zfMOMvnbnc3kE6g@mail.gmail.com> <086FCD42-FC16-4F24-8032-7F763731BB2B@nominum.com> <CAC8QAcdG2cZiWPmrELP5Jm4DYXME2ZxC1cS_LA8txKubsMayeg@mail.gmail.com> <037E6537-B7EF-449A-8581-864C798171A2@nominum.com> <2970_1343898105_501A41F9_2970_1111_1_81C77F07008CA24F9783A98CFD706F7102F8B0@PEXCVZYM12.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAC8QAcd69YMH+tV+6_qfFa0V8=85_57WW0XkXFWfqz4+iieOvA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAcd69YMH+tV+6_qfFa0V8=85_57WW0XkXFWfqz4+iieOvA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_745F5DFE6BE143218D81D15566EE13ADnominumcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "<mif@ietf.org>" <mif@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mif] MIF API - Access Network Selection
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 02 Aug 2012 17:46:07 -0000

On Aug 2, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
It also means the answer is it is implementation issue.

Yes?

Yes.   More precisely, the answer has been assumed to be out of scope, and is therefore left to the implementor.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email