Re: [netext] research article about a flat and distributed PMIP scheme

[<[e-mail]>]

Dear Hannes,
Is there actually Proxy HIP (already) on the agenda of HIP WG or HIPRG? I didn't find that at a first glance on MLs and charters ...
Thanks for providing a pointer!

Best regards
Dirk

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] Im Auftrag von Hannes Tschofenig
Gesendet: Montag, 18. Juli 2011 00:26
An: Sri Gundavelli
Cc: [e-mail]
Betreff: Re: [netext] research article about a flat and distributed PMIP scheme


Thanks.

One question though: Isn't  SIP+IEEE 802.21+PMIP vs. SIP+IEEE 802.21+HIP a comparison of apples and oranges?
Wouldn't it be more natural to compare SIP+IEEE 802.21+MIP and SIP+IEEE 802.21+HIP as well as SIP+IEEE 802.21+PMIP and SIP+IEEE 802.21+proxy HIP?

Ciao
Hannes

PS: Do you know something about the deployment status of IEEE 802.21?

On Jul 17, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Sri Gundavelli wrote:

> > The main conclusion is that the introduced SIP+IEEE 802.21+PMIP signalling scheme is quite a promising and suitable candidate for future flat mobile architectures.
>
> Thanks Goodzi for the information and sharing the paper. Very nice to know that.
>
> > however the HIP-based scheme got slightly better scores under our criteria set due to its stronger security and fewer functional elements to deploy.
>
> Well ..we need to see the criteria. It appears we need some tweaking there for the HIP :). In PMIP model, clearly there is the access authentication requirement, security between the network elements and the MAG authorization aspect, that should be sufficient for any trusted network model.
>
> Regards
> Sri
>
>
>
>
> On 7/14/11 8:14 AM, "Bokor Laszlo" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Dear Hannes,
>>
>> I believe that the PMIP-related results of this paper could be interesting for the NETEXT community. The main conclusion is that the introduced SIP+IEEE 802.21+PMIP signalling scheme is quite a promising and suitable candidate for future flat mobile architectures. We have compared the SIP+IEEE 802.21+PMIP solution with the SIP+IEEE 802.21+HIP scheme in a well defined network modell and found that both proposals have nearly the same performance, however the HIP-based scheme got slightly better scores under our criteria set due to its stronger security and fewer functional elements to deploy.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> goodzi
>>
>> --
>> László BOKOR
>> Budapest University of Technology and Economics (BME)
>> Department of Telecommunications (HIT) - Mobile Innovation Centre (MIK)
>> Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
>> web: http://www.hit.bme.hu/~bokorl
>>
>> 2011/7/14 Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>
>>> Tell us, what is the conclusion with relevance for this group?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 14, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Bokor Laszlo wrote:
>>>
>>> > Dear Folks,
>>> >
>>> > please let me advertise you a research paper about a flat and distributed PMIP scheme:
>>> >
>>> > Title: Evaluation of two integrated signalling schemes for the Ultra Flat Architecture using SIP, IEEE 802.21, and HIP/PMIP protocols
>>> > ACM link: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1975468
>>> > DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2011.02.005
>>> >
>>> > I hope you will find the above article interesting, and also that you will provide us with feedbacks on our work.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > goodzi
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > László BOKOR
>>> > Budapest University of Technology and Economics (BME)
>>> > Department of Telecommunications (HIT) - Mobile Innovation Centre (MIK)
>>> > Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
>>> > web: http://www.hit.bme.hu/~bokorl <http://www.hit.bme.hu/%7Ebokorl>  _______________________________________________
>>> > netext mailing list
>>> > [e-mail]
>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netext mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext