Re: [multimob] Charter discussion

"Thomas C. Schmidt" <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> Tue, 23 June 2009 11:32 UTC

Return-Path: <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
X-Original-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multimob@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B866D28C161 for <multimob@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=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 RUiYRRKM-NtD for <multimob@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:32:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.rz.htw-berlin.de (mail2.rz.fhtw-berlin.de [141.45.10.102]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D0A53A691F for <multimob@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:32:30 -0700 (PDT)
Envelope-to: multimob@ietf.org
Received: from [193.136.207.214] by mail2.rz.htw-berlin.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>) id 1MJ4F2-0006mf-Rk; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:32:45 +0200
Message-ID: <4A40BD54.5060002@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:32:36 +0200
From: "Thomas C. Schmidt" <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hitoshi Asaeda <asaeda@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
References: <4A3FC8CB.8070405@fhtw-berlin.de> <20090623.121049.129769176.asaeda@sfc.wide.ad.jp> <4A40AE45.3050905@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> <20090623.201815.154466603.asaeda@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
In-Reply-To: <20090623.201815.154466603.asaeda@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: multimob@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [multimob] Charter discussion
X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multicast Mobility <multimob.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob>, <mailto:multimob-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/multimob>
List-Post: <mailto:multimob@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multimob-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob>, <mailto:multimob-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:32:31 -0000

Hi Hitoshi,

Hitoshi Asaeda wrote:

>>> And why do you think problem statement is not needed?
>> Because it's there:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-mobopts-mmcastv6-ps
> 
> Maybe it does not help making people recognize the problems this
> multimob group wants to address. It just says many things. It is
> difficult to understand "what is the real problem?".
>

I guess you expect me to disagree :-): We consider the major 
contribution of the PS to bring densely together all the different key 
aspects of the problem space. This is indeed not a trivial collection 
and cannot be "easy reading".

The problem we had with all the other drafts was a very partial focus 
that missed major parts of the problems - leading to confusion and also 
to the diverse positions arising at the previous BoF (remember the wise 
words of Rajeev).

So our argument would be: if you carefully read the PS, the "real" 
problems of multicast + mobility will be very clear. Details on specific 
tasks can then be easily derived by just doing transfers.

> Ok, then how about improving the following two requirement drafts
> Behcet said today:
> 
>> Yes, specific requirements draft like:
>> http://ietfreport.isoc.org/all-ids/draft-deng-multimob-pmip6-requirement-01.txt

I promised to work on this - however, I would put higher priority on the 
BCP-type solution for PMIPv6, so I beg some patience.

>> http://ietfreport.isoc.org/all-ids/draft-liu-multimob-igmp-mld-mobility-req-01.txt
>>

We had a volunteer just two mails ago.

[...]

>>>> Specific requirements
>>>> drafts have been around (and should be improved), but will not be
>>>> needed for the initial BCP-type of activities: 
>>> Why you assume "BCP" here?
>> Because it is written in the charter / in the list Gorry sent.
> 
> Maybe a category of problem statement and requirement draft would be
> Informational?
> 

Yes, I guess so.

Best regards,

Thomas

-- 

Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt
° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences                   Berliner Tor 7 °
° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany °
° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet                   Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 °
° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 °