Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review
George Tsirtsis <tsirtsis@googlemail.com> Thu, 15 January 2009 16:12 UTC
Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: nemo-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-nemo-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F2253A6969; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596173A67AF for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
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 NF+QSSv8EZHK for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bw0-f21.google.com (mail-bw0-f21.google.com [209.85.218.21]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46C23A6969 for <mext@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by bwz14 with SMTP id 14so3615970bwz.13 for <mext@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=dnk2nllk2oahqapKc3OMq3Vr5aibWXXpxak9riGT49c=; b=GNi0vf8wDt1XIpPLgOQG4au/spq35h/pONul9ogJm3Yu69PISTCcK0SplmdOYsGUoX dEY/+FS9JIPTVHrZ7K5PCF+QMTFy83RWXkChz4y5sBRRtJwhZopjDXS8dMH53gXTmKU5 t915PmfmxOwQ69C/BC2nc0b+wqSQ5DxqkWEGM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=FZz1nPFQ9XugeWxudi+bOfnH059E3z4gdHYU00cs+SSPbi5z83uystAT+Bh7ANTgDl 1SS/rj7uDMnL2E6bsr6MlApagkYt0xdFbegp2qBJI6BOWfeeKNe9UGUcZa2+WH2eE2eY Sm+tHbAndtGYznJNOM8nkE2JY9y2H/j8ra5CE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.172.9 with SMTP id z9mr727498muo.109.1232035955619; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <C5959057.B160%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
References: <d3886a520901150613q6503aaf8v63d4b4e5a30b7463@mail.gmail.com> <C5959057.B160%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:12:35 +0000
Message-ID: <d3886a520901150812s11b07519sd963909f9daafa66@mail.gmail.com>
From: George Tsirtsis <tsirtsis@googlemail.com>
To: Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Cc: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, mext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org
I would remove the TLV completely. George On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com> wrote: > > > > On 16/01/09 1:13 AM, "George Tsirtsis" <tsirtsis@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Hesham Soliman >> <hesham@elevatemobile.com> wrote: >>> Pasi mentioned in the first paragraph that he " would strongly suggest >>> moving the whole TLV header text to the separate GRE document." >>> >> >> GT> This makes sense to me. >> >>> This is different from keeping the TLV header and removing the assignment of >>> GRE values. >> >> GT> I am still trying to understand what this means in practice. If >> you keep the TLV header and remove the GRE assigned value then the >> draft will NOT have any valid Type values for the TLV header. What is >> an implementation supposed to do with that? > > => Absolutely nothing until a number is assigned in another spec. > >> >>> Two very different approaches. It's not clear to me which one >>> you are asking for. >>> >> >> GT> If you can clarify the above I will tell you :-) > > => Hope this helps :) > > Hesham > >> >>> Hesham >>> >>> >>> On 16/01/09 1:02 AM, "George Tsirtsis" <tsirtsis@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> How are they different? Maybe I am missing something. The only type >>>> value defined currently on the TLV is for GRE. If you remove the GRE >>>> value, what is the TLV for? >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Hesham Soliman >>>> <hesham@elevatemobile.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I think what Pasi suggests makes sense and will make things easier for >>>>>> whoever defines GRE support. >>>>> >>>>> => So are you agreeing with removing the TLV completely or with simply >>>>> removing the assignment of the GRE? They're two different things. >>>>> >>>>> Hesham >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Not assigning a number for the TLV essentially means that the TLV >>>>>> header for GRE is undefined and thus nothing needs to be said about >>>>>> it. The whole thing can then be defined in a different spec as needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> George >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Hesham Soliman >>>>>> <hesham@elevatemobile.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would strongly suggest moving the whole TLV header text to the >>>>>>>> separate GRE document. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> => Personally, as everyone on the list knows, I was always against >>>>>>> including >>>>>>> this in the draft, I think it's a really bad idea, but obviously it's not >>>>>>> my >>>>>>> decision. So let's see what people say. I do agree with this suggestion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In particular, if you assign a number for GRE in this document, >>>>>>>> you either need to describe how it works here, or have a normative >>>>>>>> reference to the NETLMM spec. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> => My suggestion below was not to assign any numbers in the draft. It was >>>>>>> simply to have the TLV header unassigned and let someone else request the >>>>>>> assignment and describe how it's used. My ideal preference is the one >>>>>>> above >>>>>>> (remove it completely) but the suggestion below was a compromise to speed >>>>>>> things up. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hesham >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> Pasi >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: ext Hesham Soliman [mailto:hesham@elevatemobile.com] >>>>>>>>> Sent: 14 January, 2009 14:23 >>>>>>>>> To: mext@ietf.org >>>>>>>>> Cc: Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) >>>>>>>>> Subject: GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Folks, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Part of Pasi's review for DSMIPv6 was a comment on the lack of >>>>>>>>> specification for GRE support in the spec. He said it was vastly >>>>>>>>> under-specified, no details on the tunnelling, setting of different >>>>>>>>> parts of the GRE header ...etc. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I suggested that we don't explicitly mention GRE in the spec but we >>>>>>>>> keep the TLV tunnelling format and reserve the numbers for NETLMM to >>>>>>>>> specify exactly how it will be used in a separate document. I think >>>>>>>>> you would agree that this is largely driven by NETLMM needs and we >>>>>>>>> shouldn't specify the details in MEXT. Pasi was ok with that. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please express your opinion on this soon because Pasi's comments are >>>>>>>>> the last comments for the draft and I want to handle them by Monday >>>>>>>>> at the latest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please avoid discussing the merits of GRE....etc, the question is: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Are there any objections to removing explicit references to GRE >>>>>>>>> while reserving the numbers in the TLV header for it to be specified >>>>>>>>> clearly in NETLMM? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hesham >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> MEXT mailing list >>>>>>> MEXT@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > > > _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list MEXT@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
- [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Giaretta, Gerardo
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review George Tsirtsis
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review George Tsirtsis
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review George Tsirtsis
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review George Tsirtsis
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Vijay Devarapalli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Vijay Devarapalli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review pierrick.seite
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review pierrick.seite
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Hesham Soliman
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review Pasi.Eronen