IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netext] draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-08 and RFC 7109

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Wed, 05 February 2014 19:33 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0BF31A0138 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:33:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MJQG7jthmRvs for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:33:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA901A00EB for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:32:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71F9A880F3 for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:32:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clemson.local (c-76-21-129-88.hsd1.md.comcast.net [76.21.129.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D7B21368154 for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:32:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52F291E9.6030309@innovationslab.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 14:32:57 -0500
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: netext@ietf.org
References: <CAC8QAcf6bLXLW-Z175vTaSNkqtikP0MpLhKp8S8M+uaTUv9ODA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAcf6bLXLW-Z175vTaSNkqtikP0MpLhKp8S8M+uaTUv9ODA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qX2hmwbgdoTFtecjdeM7xpaanTI40PMP1"
Subject: Re: [netext] draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-08 and RFC 7109
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " <netext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/>
List-Post: <mailto:netext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 19:33:02 -0000

Keeping in mind that 7109 is a non-consensus & experimental RFC via the
Independent Stream...

On 2/5/14 11:36 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
> 
> Please take a look at the newly published RFC 7109,
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7109
> 
> This RFC is very relevant to draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob, due to
> HA-LMA relationship.
> 
> New Flow Binding messages defined in RFC 7109 are very relevant.
> 
> Mobility option extensions to Flow Identification Mobility option defined
> in RFC 7109 are also very relevant.
> 
> There is point in reinventing the wheel. Here it is there make use of it.
> By the way I don't mind if you wish to keep using BID anymore :-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Behcet
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email