Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs
<Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com> Wed, 02 March 2011 18:02 UTC
Return-Path: <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.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 A75DA3A67FD for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:02:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.426
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.128, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MANGLED_AVOID=2.3, 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 FOc4OdWK6BKf for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:02:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268DB3A67FB for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:02:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p22I3SOv030208; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:03:44 +0200
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:03:27 +0200
Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-005.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.60) by NOK-am1MHUB-02.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 19:03:26 +0100
Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.5.127]) by 008-AM1MMR1-005.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.60]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.002; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 19:03:25 +0100
From: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
To: sgundave@cisco.com, netext@ietf.org
Thread-Topic: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs
Thread-Index: AcvYfuevlCz6SlKTRRGiPCBHi+KqagAfsGtZAB2IlLA=
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 18:03:24 +0000
Message-ID: <97683F8C138FB243AAC90CEFB48ABF150926763D@008-AM1MPN1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <97683F8C138FB243AAC90CEFB48ABF15092675D6@008-AM1MPN1-004.mgdnok.nokia.com> <C993BB95.119F6%sgundave@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C993BB95.119F6%sgundave@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [173.64.197.89]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_97683F8C138FB243AAC90CEFB48ABF150926763D008AM1MPN1004mg_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Mar 2011 18:03:27.0134 (UTC) FILETIME=[214333E0:01CBD904]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Subject: Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs
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: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 18:02:46 -0000
Hi Sri, We did not discuss the idea of single vs multiple documents for flow mobility. As you can see from the ongoing discussion, there are concerns about the viability of flow mobility as a feature in a PMIP6 deployment. These need to be addressed before we can even consider whether a single document or multiple documents are needed to specify the feature. -Raj From: ext Sri Gundavelli [mailto:sgundave@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:17 AM To: Patil Basavaraj (Nokia-MS/Dallas); netext@ietf.org Cc: Jari Arkko Subject: Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs Raj: Thanks for the meeting minutes. Can you comment on the AD inputs w.r.t bundling every flow mobility feature in a single spec, vs multiple document deliverables. Specifically, the scope of the current work and if it must be in a single document. Thanks Sri On 3/2/11 9:04 AM, "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com> wrote: Just wanted to provide an update regarding the ongoing work on flow mobility for PMIP6 and my discussion with our ADs (Jari and Ralph) on March 1st: I have apprised our ADs about the state of the ongoing discussion on flow mobility. One of the concerns about the ongoing work on flow mobility was related to the logical interface feature. Flow mobility depends on the existence of a logical interface on the host. The WG has not addressed the concerns related to the logical interface I-D, that were raised at the previous WG meetings. Emphasised that we should get the logical interface spec done soon since it is a fundamental dependency for flow mobility. Regarding the current scope of the flow mobility work and the I-D which is now in consensus call, there are a few issues that need to be resolved. A few points below: 1. Flow mobility in the context of Proxy MIP6 is not analogous to the solution that has been developed for host based MIP6. The featureset and capabilities developed in Netext does not have to mirror, parallel or be equivalent to that of RFCs 6088/9. 2. There is no plan or expectation that there would be a way for the MN/host to do signaling related to flow mobility with a MAG at layer 3. Layer 2 is an option but obviously this requires such enhancements to be done in other SDOs. The preference is to develop a flow mobility solution that works with policies and signaling that is network centric (i.e MAG/LMA entities). 3. One of the major concerns raised on the mailing list is related to how flow mobility would work when an MN attaches to a wifi access and the LMA switches a flow(s) to the MAG serving the MN via that wifi. The MN has no way of indicating to the LMA if the wifi access is congested or for the MAG to indicate to the LMA about the state of the MNs attachment to the AP. Packets forwarded by the LMA to the MN via the wifi-MAG could be sent into a void. Without a solution for the above scenario, flow mobility would not be robust. Some clear answers are needed here. One option is that flow mobility for PMIP6 is applicable only in those access networks wherein the access network elements are aware of the state of the MNs connection and congestion state. The MAG can use this information to signal to an LMA attachment state and potentially cause flows to be switched to an alternative MAG. It may be okay to have specific statements about the limitations of flow mobility for PMIP6 documented as a sort of disclaimer. Other options? 4. The WG is free to extend the PMIP6 signaling between MAG/LMA to accomplish flow mobility. 5. And lastly the question about who is the customer for this work at this time is irrelevant. We have had this discussion during the chartering phase and there is no reason to revisit it. If I have missed any other significant (show-stopper) concern regarding the flow mobility feature, please do raise them. -Raj ________________________________ _______________________________________________ netext mailing list netext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
- [netext] Update on flow mobility following discus… Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Jari Arkko
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Stefano Faccin
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Sri Gundavelli
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Basavaraj.Patil
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Rajeev Koodli
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Julien Laganier
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Rajeev Koodli
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Julien Laganier
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Zuniga, Juan Carlos
- Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following di… Julien Laganier