IETF Logo Mail Archive

[netext] 答复: Re: Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?

zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Tue, 16 August 2011 12:21 UTC

Return-Path: <zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C9D121F8A4D for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -93.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-93.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.723, BAYES_50=0.001, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0uK+wzsBRrt0 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:21:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18EC621F86F6 for <netext@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 05:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.17.99] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 131321465182496; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:10:12 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.30.3.21] by [192.168.168.15] with StormMail ESMTP id 94545.5957719183; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:22:10 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse02.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p7GCM4UM005303; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:22:04 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn)
In-Reply-To: <CABk4tj9hoN2Swj7uL0_SSix5nVrUO946uDHQrh3pv6fHTTeRyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jong-Hyouk Lee <jong-hyouk.lee@inria.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: 9AAD9C93:D9E4F827-482578EE:0043563D; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007
Message-ID: <OF9AAD9C93.D9E4F827-ON482578EE.0043563D-482578EE.0043CF2F@zte.com.cn>
From: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:22:04 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-08-16 20:22:08, Serialize complete at 2011-08-16 20:22:08
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0043CF2D482578EE_="
X-MAIL: mse02.zte.com.cn p7GCM4UM005303
Cc: netext@ietf.org
Subject: [netext] 答复: Re: Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:21:35 -0000

Hello Lee,
Many thanks for your support. I will read the reference materials you 
provide. Regarding the comment, I will details the use case in the future 
version.

Best Regards,
Joy



Jong-Hyouk Lee <jong-hyouk.lee@inria.fr> 
2011-08-11 下午 09:50

收件人
zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn
抄送
Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org
主题
Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for 
Proxy Mobile IPv6?






Q1: Yes.
Q2: Yes.

Comments: As pointed, the use cases should be provided and personally I 
would like to introduce the following articles recently published:

1. Lightweight NEtwork MObility within PMIPv6 for Transportation Systems", 
IEEE Systems Journal: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2011.2158681
2. Performance Analysis of PMIPv6 based NEtwork MObility for Intelligent 
Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2011.2157949

Cheers.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:08 PM, <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> wrote:
Q1: Yes
Q2: Yes
Comment: please provide more details on the use case in WG I-D, e.g. the 
phrase
'It assumes that a MR [i.e. Mobile Router] is a regular IPv6 router 
without extension for mobility managements.' sounds a bit strange to me 
...

Thanks!

Regards
Dirk


[netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy 
Mobile IPv6?


At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for
Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>

General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
and observed the following:

"
Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
How many have read it: 7
How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
point to work on the problem?
In favor: 7 ;  Opposed: 1
"

We are now following up with the questions on the ML.

Question to WG:

1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
feature?

Yes   [ ]
No    [ ]

Please respond by August 18th on the ML.

-Chairs

Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt


_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext



-- 
IMARA Team, INRIA, France. 
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random.

#email: hurryon (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email