IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mif] Follow up with BBF proposal

"Hui Deng" <denghui@chinamobile.com> Fri, 31 October 2014 12:50 UTC

Return-Path: <denghui@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA7D1A8A9A for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 05:50:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.211
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RELAY_IS_221=2.222, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h0H9EUDjrL7F for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 05:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmccmta1.chinamobile.com (cmccmta1.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F7A41A887C for <mif@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 05:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.1]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app01-12001 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee154538586ee0-b4286; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 20:50:14 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee154538586ee0-b4286
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from cmccPC (unknown[219.142.190.57]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvr01-12001 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee154538585d40-616c8; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 20:50:14 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee154538585d40-616c8
From: Hui Deng <denghui@chinamobile.com>
To: "'Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)'" <sgundave@cisco.com>, 'Xueli' <xueli@huawei.com>, pierrick.seite@orange.com, 'Ted Lemon' <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>, "'STARK, BARBARA H'" <bs7652@att.com>, 'Alexandru Petrescu' <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
References: <01FE63842C181246BBE4CF183BD159B449037ECA@nkgeml504-mbx.china.huawei.com> <D0765101.175805%sgundave@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D0765101.175805%sgundave@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 20:50:12 +0800
Message-ID: <005401cff509$3719eb30$a54dc190$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0055_01CFF54C.453D2B30"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AQHP844t2YenjT+z/Eeq8YqkS0wUwJxH5yWg
Content-Language: zh-cn
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mif/TROxNnLpAOyxJRX3WPPmBHdWPrM
Cc: mif@ietf.org
Subject: [mif] Follow up with BBF proposal
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:50:27 -0000

Hi everybody

 

I am recommending that Xue Li could help to put down the slide for the problem statement from BBF. 

 

And MIP/NEMO proponents (Pierrick, Alex, Sri) and Xue Li could kindly to meet together during IETF meeting

to discuss by adding s thelide about how today solutions meet the requirement or there are some gap still, and whether that problem should be solvable in IETF.

 

Chairs will talk with AD whether MIF or somewhere else will consider to discuss those issues during the f2f session.

 

Best regards,

 

-Hui

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email