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

[Hui Deng <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Marcelo

For yoru question about what mif's scope at the moment, Jari already made
the comments on
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg00050.html

There are also several PS drafts you could refer to:
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-blanchet-mif-problem-statement-00.txt
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hui-ip-multiple-connections-ps-01.txt
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-multipleif-mn-pb-statement-00.txt

thanks

-Hui

2009/1/29 marcelo bagnulo braun <[e-mail]>

> Hi Hong,
>
> what is the scope of MIF?
> I mean, in the bof wiki page there is no charter proposed, is there a
> charter somewhere?
> In particular, is MIF going to work in MIPv6/NEMO related issues?
>
> Regards, marcelo
>
>
> Hong Yong-Geun escribió:
>
>>  Hi, Marcelo.
>>  Thanks for your comments.
>>  I agree that  the current MEXT WG charter already has several items about
>> supporting multiple interfaces.
>>  My documents are old version which were submitted to monami6 WG at 64th
>> IETF meeting and they were
>> not updated properly. So, it seems that some contents are similar to the
>> works in MEXT WG.
>> I will update my documents to focus on mif's scope.
>>  It is appreciate to understand that (even though the scope of mif is not
>> fixed) mif has different directions to
>> MEXT.
>>  Best regards.
>>  Yong-Geun.
>>
>> -----원본 메시지-----
>> *From:* "marcelo bagnulo braun" <[e-mail]>
>> *From Date:* 2009-01-28 오후 6:40:09
>> *To:* "Hong Yong-Geun" <[e-mail]>
>> *Cc:* "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "
>> [e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
>> "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
>> *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.
>> >
>>
>>
>

_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext