[netext] Follow-up on draft-route-optimization-agent // Re: IETF76 Meeting minutes

[Xiangsong Cui <[e-mail]>]

Dear Raj and others

> Reflector Extension for Route Optimization Agent Xiansong Cui
> draft-cui-netext-route-optimization-agent-ext-01.txt 5 Mins
> 
> CJB: Why LMA, not MAG doing this? Some work done for RO in Nemo,
> please take a look
> BP: Need to shut down and conclude

For the first comment, I chose MAG to implement the function because the 
agent function looks like a reactive proxy or a keeper gateway for the 
attached MN, so I integrated this function into MAG entity. I do agree that
LMA can do this function, that is OK. I highlight this point in section 3.4 and
4.1 of 02 version.

For the second comment, I had a discussion with Carlos after the F2F 
meeting, and he imparted the related work to me. Thanks Carlos again.
I reflects this comment in section 3.3 of 02 version.

Antti Makela and I have updated the draft to 02 version,
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cui-netext-route-optimization-agent-ext-02.txt
If possible, we wish this draft may be adopted as a WG item.

Any comment is highly appreciated!

Thanks and regards
Xiangsong

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 5:56 AM
Subject: [netext] IETF76 Meeting minutes


> 
> Network-Based Mobility Extensions (netext) WG Minutes
> IETF 76
> 
> WEDNESDAY, November 11, 2009, 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I
> 
> Chairs: Basavaraj Patil ([e-mail])
> Rajeev Koodli ([e-mail])
> 
> Credit for these minutes to: Antti Makela(antti dot makela at tkk dot fi>
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Agenda bashing, Blueseheets, Note takers, Jabber scribes      5 Mins
>   Change in agenda: Flow Mobility and Inter-technology handovers moved
>   to start due to conflicting schedule.
> 
> 2. PMIP6 extensions for inter-access, presenters Rajeev Koodli and
>   Jari Arkko
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-12.ppt
> and http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-6.pdf
> 
> Discussion on choices at
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/msg00881.html and
> slide 2 of JA's presentation
> 
> JA: Recharter or new WG (Netext2?)
> 
> Jonne Soininen/NSN: Everything is true, but Solution #1 is not needed
> since IP does not notice anything, constrant to 2G/3G handover in 3GPP
> JA: With different technologies where MTU changes IP level needs to be
> aware
> JS: Virtual links depend on operating systems, different on Symbian
> and FreeBSD
> JA: We shouldn't provide implementation advice, only conceptual
> JS: Can it be done in high-level fashion?
> Sri: We don't have triggering capability from UE -> MAG. How about
> moving only partial set of flows to a new interface? What is the
> evolution path? 
> JA: Is triggering at L2 or L3? Discussion so far indicated that we
> don't want L3 solution, possible PMIP extensions would transfer
> triggers around the nextwork but they'd still be L2 triggers. With L3
> triggers you  can't have inter-access handovers and PMIP.
> Sri: Can build everything on the network site, if triggering is out-of-band?
> RK:  Regardless of choice with MAG interface signaling needed between
>    LMA <-> MAG to allow for subset of flows being transferred
> 
> Juan-Carlos Zunlga: MAG <-> MN, Solution recommendations should be
> very specific Carlos J. Bernardos: I support writing BCP document
> Marcello: I think conclusions accurate.
> 
> Vote: Reasonable way forward, yes/no: ~ 17 yes, none no.
> 
> JA: Expecting text on the discussion as a basis for a minor recharter
> Sri: Can triggers come from link-layer and PMIP support it on network side?
> JA: Should be ok
> Marcelo: There is no standard-track document on this.
> 
> 3. Runtime LMA Assignment Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6, Jouni
> Korhonen http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-8.ppt
> I-D: draft-ietf-netext-redirect-00
> 
> About 5 people have read draft
> No comments forthcoming
> 
> RK: What is the motivation for mid-session LMA assignment?
> JK: Currently assignment only applies to initial assignment, input
>  needed for motivation - do people find this useful? Applies to
>  handover cases where you might cross a boundary where administrator
>  has decided to switch LMAs. Lots of assumptions in such cases (sharing
>  of mobility sessions etc)
> RK: If session is anchored at specific LMA, is there session continuity.
> JK: Have you read draft?
> RK: No
> JK: Open question at the moment, there is introduction to a discussion
>  in the draft
> RK: I don't think this should be done at all. Why both soft and hard
>  support needed? Simpler approach needed, now three-level complexity.
> JK: So, take handover exchange away, only apply assignment on initial
> PBU/PBA?
> RK: Yes
> 
> Hidetoshi Yokota: Mid-session redirection, where LMA sends back
> different LMA, session would break.
> BP: When you a redirected to new MAG, the session should go to the
> anchored LMA
> HY: It's just an example
> BP: Bad example.
> 
> Kent Leung: Why are we doing LMA reassignment during handover? I don't
> see justification. Question: What is the option in PBU?
> JK: If we apply only in initial, we don't use option. Draft doesn't
> comment on options yet.
> 
> 4. Bulk Re-registration for Proxy Mobile IPv6, Basavaraj Patil
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-1.pdf
> I-D: draft-premec-netlmm-bulk-re-registration-03
> 
> Marcos: Is this same as group ID?
> BP: Not to my understanding
> Marcos: I propose merging group ID with Charlie's draft
> RK: Charlie's draft tries to combine multiple ID's concerining single
> node
> Marcos: So, there's a connection, in this case we are just doing it
> for multiple nodes. Better to have all in single draft.
> BP: Charlie not here, but we can have different sets of IDs depending
> on policy. We can continue this on list.
> Qin Wu: How do you define flag B, it has two purposes, what if both
> purposes happen at same time.
> BP: We'll provide a clarification in future revision.
> 
> Localized routing - PS and solutions discussion
> 
> 5. PMIPv6 Localized Routing Problem Statement
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-2.ppt
> draft-ietf-netext-pmip6-lr-ps-01.txt
> BJ: Few people have read the document, please send comments, also on
> the roaming model.
> Glen Zoren(?): I was under impression that PMIP domain was set of
> nodes which could set up SA's between each other - so you can have
> dynamic domains. 
> Carlos: That's not incorrect as such, but can't make that assumption.
> GZ: I didn't mean all PMIP entities in the world.
> 
> 6. draft-oulai-netext-opt-local-routing-01.txt,  Suresh Krishnan
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-9.ppt
>>
> Kent Leung: Is the scope limited to some cases only
> SK: Yes.
> BP: What do you mean by optimized handover?
> SK: Not easy problem but if there's RO between MAGs and MN switches
> MAGs, we can use that
> KL: Is it possible to map the problem spaces of different solutions to
> different drafts for comparison?
> BP: Yes, at least we can talk now about them allow
> Marcos: What does it mean "inter-MAG tunnel may be preconfigured"
> SK: If some MAGs are close to one another, who can expect handovers
> between them, they can prepare for RO
> 
> 7. draft-koodli-netext-local-forwarding, Rajeev Koodli
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-11.ppt
> 
> ?: What triggers the transaction?
> RK: Trigger is still open.
> [Several people did not state names]
> ?2: Two LMA's are not talking to each other, how's the authentication?
> RK: If the LMAs trust each other, even if not talking, authentication is ok.
> Trust doesn't mean you have to talk. You don't want LMA <-> LMA signaling.
> What's is defined is MAG <-> MAG, with some LMA interaction. What's
> happening is dynamic delegation with fine granularity.
> BP: Cutting off discussion
> 
> 8. draft-wu-netext-local-ro Qin Wu
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-3.ppt
> 
> Mohana Jeyatharan: LMA needs to know where prefix is from
> QW: Ok, we'll address this in next revision
> 
> 9. draft-loureiro-netext-pmipv6-ro-01.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/netext-4.ppt
> 
> BP: That concludes discussion on localized routing
> 
> 10. New Proposals:
> 
> Multihoming extensions for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Carlos J. Bernardos I-D:
> draft-bernardos-mif-pmip-01.txt 5 mins
> 
> Hui Deng: Clarifications on weak/strong host models?
> BP: Let's take this on mailing list
> 
> Service Flow Identifier in Proxy Mobile IPv6
> Hui Deng - draft-hui-netext-service-flow-identifier-01.txt   5 Mins
> 
> HD: WG draft?
> BP: We need to do the rechartering process, then we can consider
> taking this on.
> 
> Bulk PBU using Bitmaps
> Mohana J. - draft-jeyatharan-netext-pmip-bulkpbu-bitmap-00  5 Mins
> 
> MJ: Comments on the way forward?
> BP: We have adopted group ID approaches as WG items, for these we need
> to do more discussions on mailing lists.
> 
> Virtual interface for supporting multihoming and inter technology
> handover Tranh M. Trung -  draft-trung-netext-virtual-interface-01 5
> Mins
> 
> Sri: Can you statement the differences between this and other related
> document(s)?
> TMT: I try to limit the modifications to mobile node.
> Sri: If it's a simple change, does this require a new document? Better
> work with existing ones
> BP: Moving on
> 
> ITHO support in MN for PMIP6
> Hidetoshi Y./Sri  G. draft-yokota-netlmm-pmipv6-mn-itho-support-02.txt
> 
> Reflector Extension for Route Optimization Agent Xiansong Cui
> draft-cui-netext-route-optimization-agent-ext-01.txt 5 Mins
> 
> CJB: Why LMA, not MAG doing this? Some work done for RO in Nemo,
> please take a look
> BP: Need to shut down and conclude
> 
> BP: Meeting adjourned, rest of the presentations not given due to lack
> of time.
> 
> Differentiated Services Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Behcet S./Frank
> Xia - draft-xia-netext-qos-00.txt
> 
> Gateway Initiated Dual-Stack Lite Deployment Sri G.
> draft-gundavelli-softwire-gateway-init-ds-lite-00
> 
> PMIPv6 and Network Mobility Problem Statement Carlos CJ.
> draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps-00
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext