IETF Logo Mail Archive

[netext] draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-08 and RFC 7109

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Wed, 05 February 2014 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB791A01FD for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:36:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QjAM1ErLpavP for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:36:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com (mail-la0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 771701A01FE for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:36:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f50.google.com with SMTP id ec20so529108lab.9 for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 08:36:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=r5tlfPbHv/NEokLtA7SFtOu4vwdB1fF3sN/eifaDBHY=; b=XCWpSPt9OLf8OWMiNIxguFe+p5eyd4OrIhu0a19OcAnmT3z1Ld9pf6BtoAZPbZjKeO eGfwnNGnmtumkapSazpLMaupMsGTvO17wFHuP7K1yGAHERAJbCVQIJFZVTqE5+FNcmXu JU4KQILZ/4Dz0e6unnhthyOgc65byBZAKlANSHVYUCtV9m2pS9tG21wlh0MzT+Ps8quK iATVwiiKk9OVelunhEgMA+aBFGDdDlTJKJk9slBoj63DfzGyGj/qKFSn7Vh5hqFT6kzX w/ATO0oWDZuHmfQRVs559VHdFJ/yjQ8FI5vBsYbCeAHKklo8F2fx22bGfRaEZR137qj1 X5ZQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.43.47 with SMTP id t15mr1752384lal.38.1391618190978; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 08:36:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.114.170.193 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:36:30 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 10:36:30 -0600
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcf6bLXLW-Z175vTaSNkqtikP0MpLhKp8S8M+uaTUv9ODA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
To: "Carlos J. Bernardos" <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c24100efb25104f1ab5b0c"
Cc: "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>
Subject: [netext] draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-08 and RFC 7109
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
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: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 16:36:34 -0000

Hi Carlos,

Please take a look at the newly published RFC 7109,
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7109

This RFC is very relevant to draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob, due to
HA-LMA relationship.

New Flow Binding messages defined in RFC 7109 are very relevant.

Mobility option extensions to Flow Identification Mobility option defined
in RFC 7109 are also very relevant.

There is point in reinventing the wheel. Here it is there make use of it.
By the way I don't mind if you wish to keep using BID anymore :-)

Regards,

Behcet

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email