Re: [nemo] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-nemo-terminology

[Romain KUNTZ <[e-mail]>]

Hello Chan-Wah,

Sorry for the delay !

Chan-Wah Ng wrote:
>>IMHO it is good to be accurate, in order to identify when the problem 
>>occurs. So what about this one:
>>
>>   Split-NEMO refers to the case where a mobile network that has
>>   multiple mobile routers handling the same MNP (or MNPs) becomes
>>   two or more independent mobile networks, where the same MNP(s)
>>   are no longer advertised in the same mobile network.
>>
> 
> 
> Hmm, I am doubtful about the last sentence, especially the last few
> words "same mobile networks".  The problem with split-NEMO is that the
> MRs cannot announce the same MNP to different NEMO.
> 
> 
> May I offer an entirely different definition:
> 
>    Split-NEMO refers to the case where a mobile network becomes
>    two or more independent mobile networks due to the separation
>    of Mobile Routers which are handling the same MNP (or MNPs)
>    in the original mobile network before separation.

Actually, I wonder if Split-NEMO should only refer to the case where
split is a problem, or to any kind of split. draft-ietf-nemo-terminology
is a terminology document and thus should be silent on the problems or
specific scenario. Other documents such as
draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-02 can then refer to Split-NEMO and
describe the problems that may occur when a split occurs (and actually
it already has a section about that).

What is your opinion?

Regards,

-- 
Romain KUNTZ
[e-mail]