IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netext] Comment on draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01

Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> Thu, 21 July 2011 16:10 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.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 50D6421F8AF1 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.525
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.926, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WqCLjYypF-Bk for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19C4021F89B8 for <netext@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=1014; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1311264608; x=1312474208; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=ssIG8Q43LLokmBUWap8TgGKf4tQUILkXo7aVJrSEWHg=; b=Qxk5T8TunCmXFa7VmXOVApfD297g0MjCd/TEmbBp0DjjzPv6ZrE7TZeB r4uNzgh1kVQNgIWSbDu6NXdb90aM6gAIQ1giDj1cB7DMQKwiJi2S3SIJY rjywdntQX5MaIFFu9h77TbaBL65UNVyFAg79JdzvT46g2o+Wi9C2Hiidi M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAE9OKE6rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABUp0B3iHydQZ4phj4Eh1WLGYUQi20
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,240,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="5158806"
Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2011 16:09:33 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6LG9Vs8012378; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:09:33 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:09:33 -0700
Received: from 10.32.246.213 ([10.32.246.213]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:09:32 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:09:26 -0700
From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Hidetoshi Yokota <yokota@kddilabs.jp>, "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <CA4D9D46.22140%sgundave@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Comment on draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01
Thread-Index: AcxHwI/fQ3u4RmbfvkyuW6xgMbseRw==
In-Reply-To: <4E28151B.3000602@kddilabs.jp>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jul 2011 16:09:33.0249 (UTC) FILETIME=[9431DB10:01CC47C0]
Subject: Re: [netext] Comment on draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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/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: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:10:09 -0000

Hi Yokota-san,

Thanks for your review.

This is essentially about IPv4 traffic offload, not about flow distribution
for multi-access terminals/flow mobility. This is not about tunnel/interface
selection for a given flow, but rather about the IPv4 flows for NAT offload
at the access edge/MAG.

Regards
Sri






On 7/21/11 5:01 AM, "Hidetoshi Yokota" <yokota@kddilabs.jp> wrote:

> Hi Sri,
> 
> I think that SIPTO is very important work and PMIPv6 should support this
> feature as you described in your draft.
> 
> I have one clarification question on this draft. What's the relationship
> with the PMIPv6 flow mobility draft
> "draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03", which also defines a spec to
> send the traffic selector (i.e., Flow ID Mobility option in the FMI)?
> 
> I suppose that these two specs are intended to be used in different
> situations, but I would appreciate if you could clarify whether they are
> complementary or one can cover the other.
> 
> Regards,

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email