Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?

Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> Thu, 18 August 2011 16:13 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 D720621F8AC3 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.284
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.284 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
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 kO+xf35eogjz for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343C821F8ABB for <netext@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=2391; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313684088; x=1314893688; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=eBzRraFrqOEkfIdu/gTBddkFJlyp45EQ6X0IAoxLlwk=; b=Bv2+l032RcT7IOWSpMUHt1yifqv89x47SQDB9i2IUyFmqTBdjj45TlO/ QhLzdkQoGFVaybMDueDSvR2HtVzzDh452n1CJZi8ctiGkgNvU5qD+8x1f h5aXqrKpVuyOFdGJjLkRWbsrfsoxYp6maZ+RWV6gFkdKj97n4xjgUZ7pV I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAOo5TU6rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABCqA9sd4FAAQEBAQIBAQEBDwEpATEQDQEIZwYwAQEEARIJEgeHTwSbCQGfDYZIBIcxL4szhRWEYYcf
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,246,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="14380936"
Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2011 16:14:48 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7IGEfBE013604; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:14:48 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:14:44 -0700
Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:14:43 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:14:41 -0700
From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>, netext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <CA728881.25763%sgundave@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
Thread-Index: Acxdwe8x6ThHFsxh8UOICnDQo9uONA==
In-Reply-To: <4E4D34C9.5050507@gmail.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2011 16:14:44.0086 (UTC) FILETIME=[F108D160:01CC5DC1]
Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
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, 18 Aug 2011 16:13:54 -0000

Alex:

If I may comment.


> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of
supporting Network Mobility with PMIP?

#1 Implies, mobility for the delegated prefixes

> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign
MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)?  The two goals are distinctive IMHO.

Assigning HNP to mobile = mobility + delegated prefix (Same as #1)

#2 Assigning MNP to NEMO Mobile Router = RFC3963. NEMO MR per definition is
CMIP enabled.


So, the draft is supporting #1.


Sri




On 8/18/11 8:50 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello Raj,
> 
> Le 10/08/2011 23:34, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit :
>> 
>> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for
>> Proxy Mobile IPv6"<draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>
>> 
>> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
>> is a required feature for PMIP6.
> 
> Please specify whether this prefix delegation feature is for the goal of
> supporting Network Mobility with PMIP?
> 
> Or is it to assign the HNP to the Mobile Host (not necessarily to assign
> MNP for NEMO Mobile Router)?  The two goals are distinctive IMHO.
> 
> This to help formulate a problem for prefix delegation for PMIP.
> 
> [...]
>> We are now following up with the questions on the ML.
>> 
>> Question to WG:
>> 
>> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?
>> 
>> Yes   [ ]
>> No    [ ]
> 
> Yes, if it is for MNP for Mobile Router.
> 
>> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
>> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
>> feature?
>> 
>> Yes   [ ]
>> No    [ ]
> 
> No, unless the problem is clearer.
> 
> I hope this helps.
> 
> Alex
> 
>> 
>> Please respond by August 18th on the ML.
>> 
>> -Chairs
>> 
>> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic 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