Re: [multimob] WG Adoption call ondraft-schmidt-multimob-pmipv6-mcast-deployment-04

Hello Dirk,

Sorry about taking so long to respond. I have taken a look at your document and I agree that we should now discuss these topics about further enhancements for multicast mobility support.

Since you have identified many potential items, perhaps we can consider ranking them as a first step?

I have some detailed comments on the draft that I'll be sending separately.

Best regards,

Juan-Carlos

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de [mailto:Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 February, 2010 3:29 AM
> To: sarikaya@ieee.org; Zuniga, Juan Carlos; multimob@ietf.org
> Cc: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com; asaeda@sfc.wide.ad.jp
> Subject: AW: [multimob] WG Adoption call ondraft-schmidt-multimob-
> pmipv6-mcast-deployment-04
> 
> Dear Carlos, all,
> 
> Following the agreed adoption of the basic Multimob protocol we can and
> should revive and extend the discussion on further enhancements for
> protocol optimization as you suggested, Carlos. For that we have
> submitted the next version of the "future work" draft to exchange on
> potential range for those issues. Although by far not all possible
> topics have been covered we would like to base the design on this
> document.
> The I-D can be found at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-von-
> hugo-multimob-future-work-01.txt
> 
> What do you think?
> Please feel free to comment!
> 
> Best regards
> Dirk
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: multimob-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:multimob-bounces@ietf.org] Im
> Auftrag von Behcet Sarikaya
> Gesendet: Montag, 22. Februar 2010 17:44
> An: Zuniga, Juan Carlos; multimob@ietf.org
> Betreff: Re: [multimob] WG Adoption call ondraft-schmidt-multimob-
> pmipv6-mcast-deployment-04
> 
> Sure.
> 
> --b
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: "Zuniga, Juan Carlos" <JuanCarlos.Zuniga@InterDigital.com>
> > To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>; multimob@ietf.org
> > Sent: Mon, February 22, 2010 10:28:46 AM
> > Subject: RE: [multimob] WG Adoption call on draft-schmidt-multimob-
> pmipv6-mcast-deployment-04
> >
> > Hi Behcet,
> 
> It is now "next week".
> 
> While the base solution is
> > cleaned up, I guess we are ready to discuss about protocol
> > enhancements.
> 
> Do you agree?
> 
> Juan Carlos
> 
> > -----Original
> > Message-----
> > From: Behcet Sarikaya [mailto:>
> ymailto="mailto:behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com"
> > href="mailto:behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com">behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com]
> >
> > Sent: Thursday, 18 February, 2010 7:46 PM
> > To: Zuniga, Juan Carlos; > ymailto="mailto:multimob@ietf.org"
> > href="mailto:multimob@ietf.org">multimob@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re:
> > [multimob] WG Adoption call on draft-schmidt-multimob-
> >
> > pmipv6-mcast-deployment-04
> >
> > Hi Carlos,
> >   This current
> > adoption call is aimed at establishing if there is
> > consensus that this
> > draft is the base solution. You are saying it is.
> >
> >   Let's
> > discuss other issues next week.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: "Zuniga, Juan
> > Carlos" <>
> href="mailto:JuanCarlos.Zuniga@InterDigital.com">JuanCarlos.Zuniga@Inte
> rDigital.com>
> >
> > > To: Stig Venaas <> href="mailto:stig@venaas.com">stig@venaas.com>;
> > ymailto="mailto:sarikaya@ieee.org"
> > href="mailto:sarikaya@ieee.org">sarikaya@ieee.org;
> > > ymailto="mailto:multimob@ietf.org"
> > href="mailto:multimob@ietf.org">multimob@ietf.org
> > > Sent: Thu,
> > February 18, 2010 4:09:32 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [multimob] WG Adoption
> > callondraft-schmidt-multimob-
> > pmipv6-mcast-deployment-04
> >
> > >
> > > Behcet, Stig,
> >
> > I'd like to understand if you
> > believe the group has reached
> > > agreement that it is worth looking at
> > optimizations on top of the
> > base
> > > solution.
> >
> >
> > It has been discussed in the list that there are scenarios
> > > where
> > the solution detailed in draft-schmidt could have limitations,
> >
> > for
> > > instance when different MNs using different LMAs join the same
> > group.
> > In such a
> > > case we can save bandwidth by having a
> > dedicated multicast LMA. Also,
> > another
> > > advantage of a
> > dedicated LMA is to avoid the need for all LMAs to
> > have
> > multicast
> > > capability and connectivity.
> >
> > I believe
> > that draft-schmidt is a very good
> > > document and if it addresses the
> > open comments sent on the list it
> > can become
> > > the base
> > solution. However, I also believe that we have enough
> > interest in
> > the
> > > group to pursue further enhancements on top of this base
> > solution.
> >
> > Please
> > > let me know your views.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Juan Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> multimob mailing list
> multimob@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob