IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netext] Needs of traffic spec. on MAG?

"Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com> Thu, 19 August 2010 15:52 UTC

Return-Path: <julienl@qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECB453A6956 for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 WGX3Xobh1r+d for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com (wolverine02.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A83DA3A6912 for <netext@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=julienl@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1282233172; x=1313769172; h=from:to:cc:date:subject:thread-topic:thread-index: message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language: content-language:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator: acceptlanguage:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; z=From:=20"Laganier,=20Julien"=20<julienl@qualcomm.com> |To:=20"cjbc@it.uc3m.es"=20<cjbc@it.uc3m.es>|CC:=20Tran =20Minh=20Trung=20<trungtm@etri.re.kr>,=20"Koodli,=20Raje ev"=0D=0A=09<rkoodli@cisco.com>,=20Youn-Hee=20Han=20<yh21 .han@gmail.com>,=20"netext@ietf.org"=0D=0A=09<netext@ietf .org>|Date:=20Thu,=2019=20Aug=202010=2008:52:52=20-0700 |Subject:=20RE:=20[netext]=20Needs=20of=20traffic=20spec. =20on=20MAG?|Thread-Topic:=20[netext]=20Needs=20of=20traf fic=20spec.=20on=20MAG?|Thread-Index:=20Acs/tW7Jzztn7DOLQ GKQxxJiz9ezgQAAO8aw|Message-ID:=20<BF345F63074F8040B58C00 A186FCA57F1F680254B0@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com> |References:=20<4c5025dc.1b768e0a.5695.6b00@mx.google.com >=0D=0A=09=20<1280322397.4001.21.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> =0D=0A=09=20<BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1F66885569@N ALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>=0D=0A=09=20<4D354782243651468 22AE9E3AD4A26661212E67F@exchtewks3.starentnetworks.com> =0D=0A=09=20<AANLkTiniH6k_pOw2B=3Dn_5JhU_4ye+t2Qzu33B4Ry8 Jb2@mail.gmail.com>=0D=0A=09=20<BF345F63074F8040B58C00A18 6FCA57F1F680254AC@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>=0D=0A=20<1 282232729.14206.65.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es>|In-Reply-To: =20<1282232729.14206.65.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> |Accept-Language:=20en-US|Content-Language:=20en-US |X-MS-Has-Attach:|X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:|acceptlanguage: =20en-US|Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"iso-8 859-1"|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted-printable |MIME-Version:=201.0; bh=YZrR7mRlR6VbnI+EBnXKh5/sKQyCURwjHKZIybDAq34=; b=zJtj46RSEmwm/kkTgLBUPJtmxm9NDttbYErG47BUsQRDqk+Hq7OHRGwn O4BqqwolrB50Neax4Xjyh7Qi4+xUetjdtX6dvZMLAcmJXJF7mOnza7nTK STGu365Jqd4lkuHXcaEiMrqYIiFbbldqL37ON4/DpelZWZ2pRrZns0zPM 4=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6078"; a="51442089"
Received: from ironmsg03-l.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.18]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2010 08:52:52 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.56,231,1280732400"; d="scan'208";a="4405339"
Received: from nasanexhub02.na.qualcomm.com ([10.46.143.120]) by Ironmsg03-L.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 19 Aug 2010 08:52:52 -0700
Received: from nalasexhub02.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.130.89) by nasanexhub02.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.143.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.254.0; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:52:54 -0700
Received: from NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.7.118]) by nalasexhub02.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.130.89]) with mapi; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:52:54 -0700
From: "Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com>
To: "cjbc@it.uc3m.es" <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:52:52 -0700
Thread-Topic: [netext] Needs of traffic spec. on MAG?
Thread-Index: Acs/tW7Jzztn7DOLQGKQxxJiz9ezgQAAO8aw
Message-ID: <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1F680254B0@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>
References: <4c5025dc.1b768e0a.5695.6b00@mx.google.com> <1280322397.4001.21.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1F66885569@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com> <4D35478224365146822AE9E3AD4A26661212E67F@exchtewks3.starentnetworks.com> <AANLkTiniH6k_pOw2B=n_5JhU_4ye+t2Qzu33B4Ry8Jb2@mail.gmail.com> <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1F680254AC@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com> <1282232729.14206.65.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es>
In-Reply-To: <1282232729.14206.65.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Tran Minh Trung <trungtm@etri.re.kr>, "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netext] Needs of traffic spec. on MAG?
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:52:21 -0000

Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano [mailto:cjbc@it.uc3m.es] wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 08:27 -0700, Laganier, Julien wrote:
> > Tran Minh Trung wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree that the prefix p3, according to RFC 5213 , does not have to
> > > be simultaneously assigned to MAG1.
> >
> > I think talking about prefix assigned to a specific MAG is misleading.
> > The prefix is assigned to the mobile node thru the NETLMM fabric,
> > irrespective of which MAG(s) the mobile node is attached too.
> >
> > When flow mobility is enabled, the prefixes assigned to the mobile
> > node can be used thru more than one interfaces, attached to more than
> > one MAG.
> >
> > >                                          However when we use logical
> > > interface at the MN, the prefix p3 should be shareable to allow flow
> > > mobility.  In addition, the logical interface can receive packets
> > > sent to any of its sub-interfaces as described in
> > > draft-melia-netext-logical-interface-support-01 (property #2).
> > >
> > > The question here is how to change RFC 5213 to support shared-prefix
> > > model?
> 
> We should be careful about the wording, "shared-prefix model" is
> commonly referred to the assignment of the same prefix to multiple MNs,
> whereas here we are talking about assigning the same prefix to multiple
> interfaces of the same MN. It is not exactly the same thing, IMHO.

Fair enough.

How about "per-MN HNP set"?

--julien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email