Re: [netext] PMIP purists - is PMIP-NEMO impossible? draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps

Hi Behcet,

No draft but magazine journal.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2009.4939291

Regards,

Seil

-----Original Message-----
From: Behcet Sarikaya [mailto:sarikaya2012@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 9:22 PM
To: Seil Jeon
Cc: netext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netext] PMIP purists - is PMIP-NEMO impossible?
draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps

Hi Seil,

MR as mobile MAG could work.
Is there a draft on this?

Regards,

Behcet

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Seil Jeon <seiljeon@av.it.pt> wrote:
> Hi Behcet,
>
> See inline [SJ].
>
> Regards,
>
> Seil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Behcet Sarikaya
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 7:48 PM
> To: Alexandru Petrescu
> Cc: netext@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netext] PMIP purists - is PMIP-NEMO impossible?
> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> Thanks for bringing this issue up :-).
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Alexandru Petrescu 
> <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> NETEXT WG members,
>>
>> It was said at times that PMIP-NEMO is impossible.  PMIP is a core 
>> network protocol, where mobility is supported without modifying the MN.
>>
>> Or, in some PMIP-NEMO proposals, the MN _is_ modified: for example it 
>> adds DHCP Client on it; or other times it performs HNP Division.
>>
>> BEcause of this there exist statements that PMIP-NEMO is impossible.
>>
>> Do you think there are other reasons why PMIP-NEMO is impossible?
>>
>
> Basically, Nemo requires an MR. MR must be placed at the PMIP MN. This 
> is the fundamental problem. I don't think it is possible to make an MR 
> without changing MN. So far I have not seen any solutions.
>
> [SJ] In my knowledge, an MN doesn't need to be changed if the MR acts 
> as a moving MAG, which has the responsibility of MN detection i.e. 
> MN's attach and detach, and sending/receiving PBU/PBA instead of the 
> MN. Regarding on this issue, it was described at the Paris meeting I
remember.
>
>
> You are talking about a protocol that is designed to not to modify MN.
>
>> Do you think that running DHCP Client on MN is a modification to MN?
>>
>
> Standard clients are OK.
>
> The problem with the WG draft is that it requires an DHCP client 
> extended with PD.
>
> I would like draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps to be revised with 
> a discussion of this fundamental problem in PMIP-Nemo.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>