Re: [netext] WGLC: I-D draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications

Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es> Tue, 28 May 2013 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
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 36AFF21F9709 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2013 06:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 CjAuB1nJhQrz for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2013 06:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5678E21F9701 for <netext@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2013 06:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10AEC86A6E2; Tue, 28 May 2013 15:23:56 +0200 (CEST)
X-uc3m-safe: yes
X-uc3m-safe: yes
Received: from [172.24.10.8] (public.eurecom.fr [193.55.113.196]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: cjbc@smtp02.uc3m.es) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7E3D86A017; Tue, 28 May 2013 15:23:55 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <1369747435.4365.13.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es>
From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
To: Basavaraj Patil <bpatil1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 15:23:55 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAA5F1T3s-uOPf-1AzLmK1kK+eM_PX1kzg5mYkoNKVtB3wLdYFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA5F1T3s-uOPf-1AzLmK1kK+eM_PX1kzg5mYkoNKVtB3wLdYFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1224-7.0.0.1014-19898.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--21.368-7.0-31-1
X-imss-scan-details: No--21.368-7.0-31-1
Cc: "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netext] WGLC: I-D draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
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, 28 May 2013 13:24:08 -0000

Hi,

I've read the document and I support moving it forward.

I just have a very minor comment: Figure 1 shows the re-registration use
case in which the notification message is acked (message 6), while in
the text of Section 5.1 it is recommended not to set the flag A in the
Update Notification message (and therefore, not to send an
acknowledgement message).

Thanks,

Carlos

On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 11:49 -0500, Basavaraj Patil wrote:
> 
> 
> The Netext working group I-D: Update Notifications for Proxy Mobile
> IPv6 <draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-04> has been revised
> following the chair review. 
> 
> 
> This note is the start of the working group last call for the Update
> Notifications for PMIPv6 I-D. Please review and post your comments to
> the list.
> 
> 
> The working group last call will end on June 1st, 2013. 
> 
> 
> I-D URL:
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-04.txt
> 
> 
> -Chairs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext