IETF Logo Mail Archive

[netext] draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Mon, 11 June 2012 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
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 E5AE221F844B for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 m2N-v2SemUsU for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFA5021F844A for <netext@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yenq13 with SMTP id q13so3244824yen.31 for <netext@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=73uAgvGE5DKajr33k0gxKr0aBXlDisZpsPl4/dYJ1lU=; b=ufKJ8GC6lHbfqGfHVKCcxvTRHa05bfuS8dD3m2VvSlm4H2TZAQ2AIj1N3OFt0NxBmc 69JPcAOBH7C+q19bnOYYnHb2sZ+5SkehPADW/7njoxoYd+ncohM1bOORAb4A0B2CFwfV hbzs6RJZuYar8eVgwEofvPnw5eXjcB595YleYEEENtuVARaXc50uah7EsQNz79lFStoO /YZK6jHySPSqGviYLouc6n98q7IwRlSsoxDuUP0WjIfvJXrGuF6ZsMeXe6+FTly91HID j2Kv9xliQzbUFMstwt/LpYrGfJINDaWLnv7GeiYqoFQUCCHOLFp7hJSaLR6AbIXCGOnp XHNQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.195.234 with SMTP id ih10mr7059108igc.0.1339438359056; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.118.210 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:12:39 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcdqtxu_C3Xb1TZoj3k1iP7A4oifmyJv_TQ_nDB_=S4iDw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
To: Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>, netext@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: [netext] draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
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: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 18:12:41 -0000

Hi Carlos,

Can you please take a look at
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-sarikaya-netext-fb-support-extensions-02.txt?

I am hearing the some implementers that they first implement the
extensions we defined in this draft before implementing flow mobility
protocol for PMIPv6.

To me it makes sense given the fact that with the current model in RFC
5213, it is impossible to do any flow mobility.

What do you think?

Regards.

Behcet

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status