Re: [multimob] re Adoption of HO drafts incl. draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast

[liu dapeng <[e-mail]>]

Hello Thomas,

2012/8/7, Thomas C. Schmidt <[e-mail]>:
> Hi Dapeng Liu,
>
> On 06.08.2012 00:28, liu dapeng wrote:
>
>>
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This draft is - if you want so - a competitor to
>> draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast, but has never been
>> worked out (as have several other attempts in the past). If this
>> document was to be advanced, it had to rewrite (or copy ??) 80 % of
>> our draft, which is not a proper way to treat authorship.
>>
>> ===>
>> I aggree draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 is a competitor of
>> draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast.  Further more,
>> draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover was written in June 2009 and after
>> this draft was submitted for more than half a year, other similar
>> draft was submitted and have a lot common idea of our draft. So I
>> really do not see why someone say if this document was to be advanced,
>> it will need to "COPY" 80% of
>> draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast?
>>
>> To Behcet:
>>
>> 1. First of all, may I ask why IETF need more than one solution for
>> one problem?
>> 2. If the group have decided to allow more than one WG draft forthis
>> problem, I then also request the group to consider
>> draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 as one basis of WG document.
>>
>
> Two answers:
>
>   1. There may be several solutions for different scenarios on the same
> problem scope, as the unicast-people worked out several solutions (i.e.,
> MIPSHOP worked out the (P)FMIPv6 handover solution and the transient
> binding in parallel.

===>
Then may I ask what is the different scenarios in the PMIPv6 multicast
fast handover case?

>   2. draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 has never been worked out. In
> fact, it merely repeats incomplete work that has been around for years,
> the first draft with incomplete sketches on fast handover has been
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-suh-mipshop-fmcast-mip6-00 in 2004!

==>
draft-suh-mipshop-fmcast-mip6-00  is the solution for Mobile IPv6 and
draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover is the solution for PMIP. That is
different scenario.
The author of draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover even did not noticed
that there was a mipshop draft at that time so I do not see why using
the word "repeat". But I do notice that
draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast has a lot similarity
with draft-suh-mipshop-fmcast-mip6-00.


regards,
Dapeng

> So the argument we were presenting is: there is reason and need for this
> fast handover solution, and we should adopt the document that is most
> mature, completely worked out and discussed many times in the WG.
>
> Cheers,
>
> 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: [phone] °
> ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: [phone] °
>


-- 

------
Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu