Re: [Mipshop] MIPSHOP Re-chartering

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Vijay Devarapalli wrote:

> Wassim Haddad wrote:
>> Hello Vijay,
>> 
>> I don't know how the selection of new ietms have been made, 
>
> Simple. :)
>
> The DHCP and DNS extensions to enable MIH server discovery are
> normative dependencies for the MIH solution document we have.
> At the last IETF meeting, folks seemed to be comfortable with
> having the MIH solution split across three documents.
>
> Using FMIPv6 for PMIPv6 is a new topic. There seems to be
> interest in using FMIPv6 to tunnel packets between MAGs. The
> draft also on the 3GPP2-IETF dependency list (that means 3GPP2
> is planning to use the mechanism described in the draft).

=> What about leaving this one for Netlmm? I assume that it is mainly 
because FMIPv6 is a MIPSHOP product. Right?

> The p2p link prefix management for FMIPv6 and using AAA-based
> infrastructure for FMIPv6 key management have been discussed
> quite a bit in MIPSHOP WG in the past. Both are considered
> necessary for FMIPv6.
>
>> but I would like to add suggest adding further work on RFC4866 as it 
>> has been described in draft-haddad-mext-netflood-defense-00. 
>
> Sure, but I would like to see some interest from other folks.
> There hasn't been much discussion on
> draft-haddad-mext-netflood-defense-00.

=> This is not about mentioning the draft itself in the charter. It is 
instead about an issue in RFC4866 (which is also a MIPSHOP product) which 
is still open and needs to be solved. I think you have to mention such
issue in the new charter. If you need more text, please ask.

Wassim H.

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
Mipshop@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop