Re: [netext] Conclusion of consensus call to adopt I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03

[<[e-mail]>]

Behcet,

Please read the following email:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02130.html
that I posted to the list.

There is no good solution to the critical issue that has been raised by
Julien et al.
If you or anyone has a good solution, please convince the WG.

At this time the I-D will be accepted as WG doc without this feature
included. Period.

-Raj

On 8/19/11 10:17 AM, "ext Behcet Sarikaya" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Hello,
>
>
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> The consensus call on whether to adopt as WG I-D: Proxy Mobile IPv6
>> Extensions to Support Flow Mobility,
>> I-D:draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 has now been completed.
>> Please see
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg02068.html for
>> the details of the consensus call itself.
>> 
>> Conclusion is as follows:
>> 
>> There is strong consensus to adopt the I-D as the starting point of
>> the work in the working group with the condition that the LMA
>> initiated flow switching feature be removed from the text prior to it
>> being posted as the WG doc.
>
>
>Remove LMA initiated flow switching?
>
>What are you talking about?
>
>It is 95% of the draft. The design team agreed to make it LMA initiated.
>
>
>
>I could not see the consensus on this technical issue from the mail, how
>did it come about?
>
>Talk to Yokota-san, he is going to tell you why LMA/HA initiated flow
>switching is feasible and should be done.
>
>Regards,
>
>Behcet
>