Re: [MEXT] [mif] Multiple interfaces problems in MEXT and mif

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Thu, 29 January 2009 10:17 UTC

Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: mip6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-mip6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 934DC3A6B54; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:17:32 -0800 (PST)
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 542073A69C3; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:17:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.855
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.303, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_MEETING=2.697, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
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 h2m2VstPhhHN; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:17:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.166.172.106]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3DC63A6359; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:17:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nephilia.intra.cea.fr (nephilia.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.33]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id n0TAH1K9001986; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:17:01 +0100
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by nephilia.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n0TAH1fg019122; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:17:01 +0100 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.133.173]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.1) with ESMTP id n0TAH05J015880; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:17:00 +0100
Message-ID: <4981821C.1030808@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:17:00 +0100
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hong Yong-Geun <yghong@etri.re.kr>
References: <545501c981ba$8155e500$8310fe81@etri.info>
In-Reply-To: <545501c981ba$8155e500$8310fe81@etri.info>
Cc: mif@ietf.org, julien.laganier.IETF@googlemail.com, mext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MEXT] [mif] Multiple interfaces problems in MEXT and mif
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/pipermail/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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org

Hong Yong-Geun a écrit :
[...]
> It is appreciate to understand that (even though the scope of mif is 
> not fixed) mif has different directions to MEXT.

Do the 'DNS control protocol' directions mentioned in MIF differ somehow
from the existing MEXT monami6-inherited directions?  Does MEXT address
'DNS control protocol' when multiple-interfaces-in-a-host are involved?

Alex

> 
> Best regards.
> 
> Yong-Geun.
> 
> -----원본 메시지----- *From:* "marcelo bagnulo braun" <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>;
>  *From Date:* 2009-01-28 오후 6:40:09 *To:* "Hong Yong-Geun" 
> <yghong@etri.re.kr>; *Cc:* "mext@ietf.org"; <mext@ietf.org>;, 
> "mif@ietf.org"; <mif@ietf.org>;, "julien.laganier.IETF@googlemail.com"; 
> <julien.laganier.IETF@googlemail.com>;, "denghui02@gmail.com"; 
> <denghui02@gmail.com>; *Subject:* Re: Multiple interfaces problems in 
> MEXT and mif
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In the current MEXT charter there are several items about supporting
>  multiple interfaces, including the following two:
> 
> - A document explaining the motivations for a node using multiple 
> interfaces and the scenarios where it may end up with multiple global
>  addresses on its interfaces [Informational]
> 
> - An analysis document explaining what are the limitations for mobile
>  hosts using multiple simultaneous Care-of Addresses and Home Agent 
> addresses using Mobile IPv6, whether issues are specific to Mobile 
> IPv6 or not [Informational].
> 
> I think this is very similar to the scope of one of you documents at
>  least, so i would find very strange that the same work is chartered 
> in two different working groups.
> 
> Moreover, we do have wg documents for these two, but we find very 
> hard to find reviewers for those, which makes me think that there is 
> not much interest on these. So, if you find a more motivated crew to 
> do the work, that would be great, we can either do it in mext or 
> soemwhere else, if people feels that needs to be done, but that is 
> certainly not the feeling i am getting from the input in mext
> 
> Regards, marcelo
> 
> 
> 
> Hong Yong-Geun escribi?:
>> 
>> Hi, all in MEXT and mif.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> In IETF mif (Multiple Interface) mailing list 
>> (_https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif_ 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>),
>> 
>> we now discuss the host which would like to use multiple 
>> interfaces.
>> 
>> I understand that MEXT WG is also related to the use of multiple 
>> interfaces of a host using Mobile IPv6 or a mobile router using 
>> NEMO Basic Support and their variants
>> 
>> MEXT WG is focuing on monami6 related topic (multiple CoA, Multiple
>>  HoA, and Multple HA, etc.,) and extedning Mobile IPv6 and NEMO for
>>  these, but mif is not related to this direction. In mif, source 
>> address selection, routing and DNS control protocol are 
>> consideration items due to multiple interfaces of a host.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> For mif’s scope, Jari Arkko made some comments and classification 
>> of problems.
>> 
>> _http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg00050.html_
>> 
>> Among these classification which includes access selection, split 
>> DNS, configuration reconciliation, routing, address selection, 
>> tunnel multihoming, and the communication way between the host and
>>  the network about their policies regarding all of the above, Jari 
>> said that access selection is already coverd in RFC 5113 and tunnel
>>  multihoming is already covered in MEXT WG work items.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> At monami6 WG in 64th IETF meetinng, I submitted and presented two
>>  Internet Drafts.
>> 
>> - Analysis of multiple interfaces in a Mobile Node
>> 
>> _http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-multipleif-mn-pb-statement-00.txt_
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - Virtual network interface for multiple interfaces in a Mobile 
>> node using Mobile IPv6
>> 
>> _http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-virtualif-mn-mipv6-00.txt_ 
>> <http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-virtualif-mn-mipv6-00.txt>
>> 
>> Because these two drafts were not in the monami6 WG’s scope and 
>> virtual network interface draft was
>> 
>> implementation specific, there were not adoped in monami6 WG’s work
>>  items. The intentions of two drafts are supporting multiple 
>> interfaces of a host without extending Mobile IPv6/NEMO.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I think that multiple interfaces problems of a host are related to
>>  both Mobile IP/NEMO specific issues and general network issues. 
>> Mobile IP/NEMO specific issues are related to extending of Mobile 
>> IP/NEMO and these are already studied in MEXT WG and general 
>> network issues which were not related to Mobile IP/NEMO could be 
>> studied in mif. As same manner, I think that my drafts could be 
>> discussed and developed in mif. In the first draft (Analysis 
>> document), I classified multiple interface problems into Mobile 
>> IPv6-sepcific issues, General network issues, and heterogeneous 
>> environment issues.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Including Hui Deng in mif, with regarding to these drafts, they 
>> want to hear comments from MEXT WG’s point of view, because it 
>> seems that these drafts are quite related to monami6/MEXT WG. So, I
>>  ask MEXT to review whether there are
>> 
>> some overlap between MEXT works and my drafts or not.
>> 
>> It is appreciate to give comments.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards.
>> 
>> Yong-Geun.
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ mif mailing list 
> mif@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif


_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext