[Netext] Scope of proposed work

Thanks Raj for this precise and to the point objective of NetExt.

I think if we all agree on this objective, then hopefully, it will be
much easier to fill in the missing charter work items.

Regards,
Ahmad

> -----Original Message-----
> From: netext-bounces at mail.mobileip.jp 
> [mailto:netext-bounces at mail.mobileip.jp] On Behalf Of 
> Basavaraj.Patil at nokia.com
> Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 3:30 PM
> To: netext at mail.mobileip.jp
> Subject: [Netext] Scope of proposed work
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> There is an issue in the current debate that we should put to rest.
> Netext proposes to extend PMIP6 to support multihoming, flow 
> mobility and inter-technology handovers (in addition to 
> others over which there is an agreement on). 
> 
> It is recognized that host based Mobile IP (RFC3775) and 
> DSMIP6 has these capabilities currently. I dont think there 
> is any debate about that. 
> However there is an interested group of people within the 
> IETF community who would like to extend PMIP6 to support 
> these features as well. 
> It is not uncommon in the IETF to have multiple competing 
> protocols provide similar functionality. The industry will 
> ultimately choose an appropriate solution depending on the 
> needs. So I dont think we can just quash the idea of working 
> on these extensions simply because we already have a protocol 
> that does it.
> It is also noted that one of the primary reasons for 
> developing PMIP6 was to provide mobility without host 
> involvement. The term "host-changes" in the context of the 
> current discussion are still to a large extent based on the 
> PMIP6 intent. As long as we are not defining a new protocol 
> on the host, we can consider the host as being unmodified 
> (from this disucssions PoV).
> 
> In summary I would say that this is not a discussion about 
> whether host based Mobile IP (MIP6) is the appropriate 
> protocol for providing multihoming, Flow mobility and, 
> inter-tech HOs but rather about what can be done to provide 
> similar capabilities to PMIP6 without (grossly) changing the 
> basic protocol principles.
> 
> -Raj
> 
> P.S: I recognize that some would say that inter-tech HOs and 
> multihoming are already features supported by PMIP6. In the 
> current context of Netext, what is being proposed is 
> basically enhancements to
> PMIP6 that address scenarios not currently in the base spec.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NetExt mailing list
> NetExt at mail.mobileip.jp
> http://www.mobileip.jp/mailman/listinfo/netext
> 