IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs

Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> Wed, 02 March 2011 20:08 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4D2A3A6831 for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:08:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.018
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.581, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0OZqvGJILYrS for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:08:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 034A73A6862 for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:08:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=1154; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1299096589; x=1300306189; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=69fzniDzy8kpT5p3ZKUL4DkUGisYEkjIz/GJGojKqVw=; b=NEc0IYIcexE6UxXsdjECi62t0GX2Qj2UCbo0grIFsSK/t3PyJMS9XmH5 YGgR7e8JLjKrWov8tkwfWzRt+OSHbIxtDSJm4cOrW4n8/dl2S89HQU99I hYfFE+8S01MV46TP3tHLoBZ6Jj4X7leadRjESDJ4btSqwKZAGuBpklXKg s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEALQybk2rRN+J/2dsb2JhbACmbnSiTpt9hWEEhReHD4NG
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.62,254,1297036800"; d="scan'208";a="316627920"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Mar 2011 20:09:49 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p22K9nFa000272; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:09:49 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-21b.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.143]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:09:49 -0800
Received: from 10.32.246.211 ([10.32.246.211]) by xmb-sjc-21b.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.143]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:09:49 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.28.0.101117
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 12:11:10 -0800
From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Message-ID: <C993E45E.11A98%sgundave@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs
Thread-Index: AcvZFfivoE5qZ/AUrkumPJFkMabQ7g==
In-Reply-To: <4D6E9F44.7060202@piuha.net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Mar 2011 20:09:49.0786 (UTC) FILETIME=[C8E013A0:01CBD915]
Cc: netext@ietf.org, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
Subject: Re: [netext] Update on flow mobility following discussion with ADs
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 20:08:43 -0000

Hi Jari:

Thanks for your response.

Sure, technical correctness of the spec is more important than the
document(s) structure management.

> (And of course, splitting to different specifications should not be
> misused to hide a technical omission or a problem.)

On the contrary, I think we are discussing many features, mixing all the
issues and without being able to differentiate between a real technical
issue in the base feature, vs. a technical issue in some other requirement
which is of interest to few folks.

I hope and I'm certain, Basavaraj will structure the documents and put a
proper context around the discussions and disagreements.


Regards
Sri
 



On 3/2/11 11:49 AM, "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote:

> Sri:
> 
> What Basavaraj said. I don't think the number of specifications is a big
> concern either now or later. Split the documents the way you like. Lets
> discuss functionality, robustness, assumptions instead -- those are
> important.
> 
> (And of course, splitting to different specifications should not be
> misused to hide a technical omission or a problem.)
> 
> Jari
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email