Re: multihoming topics (was: [nemo] Preparing NEMO Slot for Vancouver)

[Thierry Ernst <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Alex for rising this up !

> > The NEMO WG will meet at Vancouver for a 2 hours session.
> > 
> > In Paris, we mentioned about rechartering the WG, so I think this
> > will be one of the important discussion: how are we 
> > 
> > So, the main topics will be:
> > 1. status of WG documents
> > 2. RO PB Statement
> > 3. RO issues we should work on, and where
> > 4. Multihoming: what issues we should work on, and where
> > 5. Rechartering (mainly based on point 3 & 4)
> 
> Thierry, just a question.  I agree with most points in the agenda.
 
> Isn't the 4th topic dealt with in Monami6 WG?  I mean, we already had
> extensive discussion slots at several NEMO meetings about what are the
> multi-homing issues and where should they be worked on.  And then
> there was Monami6 BoF, and now Monami6 is created so they should
> logically be worked there, no?

We still didn't come to a conclusion about which of the issues should be
dealt with in each WG. The corresponding text (i.e. suggestion by draft
authors) has been clarified in the new version (not announced yet,
but it's available from 
http://www.nautilus6.org/doc/drafts/draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-04.txt
http://www.nautilus6.org/doc/drafts/draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-04.html
See Figure 10: Matrix of NEMO Multihoming Issues 
)

We need this discussion to happen now before the meeting in order to
conclude in Vancouver. 

So, Monami6 has not been chartered to solve these issues, besides the
multiple CoA registration. This means that most of the issues are
WG-orphan. If the issues are important to be solved, and can be solved
in a reasonable way, we should discuss which WG should take care of
them, and go in these WGs to make them consider these new topics. We do
think that some should be dealt with Monami6.

Can we start the debate on this so that ChanWah doesn't have the
impression to repeat himself in Vancouver ?

Thanks,
Thierry.