Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc?

Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es> Fri, 12 August 2011 03:46 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 AA02421F850B for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, 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 nToFh0ZpkV7M for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9743721F86BB for <netext@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-uc3m-safe: yes
Received: from [10.0.2.4] (modemcable093.1-80-70.mc.videotron.ca [70.80.1.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DC8704A45; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 05:46:43 +0200 (CEST)
From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
To: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com
In-Reply-To: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F237@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr>
References: <CA68600C.1CED7%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com> <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A263F118328@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201D4F237@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-hmvskdUIsj4+TqlkXv2G"
Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 05:46:42 +0200
Message-ID: <1313120802.14232.19.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-6.8.0.1017-18318.003
Cc: netext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc?
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: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 03:46:10 -0000

Hi Pierrick,

I think that once the draft becomes WG document, as long as it fits in
the charter, it's up to the WG to decide if MN initiated mobility should
be also considered.

Thanks,

Carlos

On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 10:42 +0200, pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm in favor of this document but I've one question:
> 
> In the current version, the LMA makes decision to move flows and the MN
> follows that decision to forward packets on the right interface.
> However, during IETf80, we had good arguments in favour of the MN making
> decision to move flows. 
> 
> So, the question is: do you plan, in this I-D, to consider also MN
> initiated mobility management or shall we consider only network
> initiated mobility  ?
> 
> Pierrick
> 
> > 
> > Betreff: [netext] Consensus call: Adopt I-D
> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-
> > flowmob-03 as Netext WG doc?
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > At IETF81 the chairs made a proposal to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile
> IPv6
> > Extensions to Support Flow Mobility
> > <draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03> As the starting point for
> > the specification defining flow mobility for Proxy Mobile IPv6.
> > We gauged support for and against adopting this I-D at the IETF81 WG
> > meeting with the following result:
> > 
> > In favor: 18
> > Opposed: None
> > 
> > As per process we are following up on the mailing list with the same
> > question. Please respond by Aug 18th, 2011 to the question below:
> > 
> > Q: Should we adopt as Netext WG I-D the document:
> > draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 which will be used as the
> > starting point in specifying the flow mobility feature for Proxy
> > Mobile IPv6?
> > 
> > Yes   [ ]
> > No    [ ]
> > 
> > 
> > -Chairs
> > 
> > IETF81 WG minutes are posted 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
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

-- 
Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano  http://www.netcom.it.uc3m.es/
GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA  4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67