Re: [netext] Consensus call on adopting I-D draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos as WG document

Hi,

I believe that this draft makes one step further in providing QoS over
PMIP links. I support the adoption of this I-D as a WG document.
Best regards,

-Florin Baboescu

On 5/23/12, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> The authors of the I-D: Quality of Service Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
> <draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos>
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-qos-01.txt
>
> have requested the adoption of this I-D as a WG document.
> The I-D itself has been presented at IETF83 and has also been reviewed by
> multiple WG members.
>
> The crux of the proposal is to extend PMIP6 signaling to enable support
> for QoS.
>
> Abstract
>
>    This specification defines a new mobility option that can be used by
>    the mobility entities in the Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain to exchange
>    Quality of Service parameters associated with a subscriber's IP
>    flows.  Using the QoS option, the local mobility anchor and the
>    mobile access gateway can exchange available QoS attributes and
>    associated values.  This enables QoS policing and labeling of packets
>    to enforce QoS differentiation on the path between the local mobility
>    anchor and the mobile access gateway.  Furthermore, making QoS
>    parameters available on the MAG enables mapping these parameters to
>    QoS rules being specific to the access technology which operates
>    below the mobile access gateway.  After such mapping, QoS rules can
>    be enforced on the access technology components, such as an IEEE
>    802.11e Wireless LAN controller.
>
>
> Please review the I-D and respond by June 6th with your opinion.
> Respond to the following question:
>
> Should the Netext WG adopt this I-D as a WG document?
>
> Yes   [  ]
> No    [  ]
>
> Thank you.
> -Chairs
>
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>