Re: [netext] Logical Interface draft

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I've reviewed http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support/and I have no particular issue to raise, just few editorial suggestions (please see below). So, I agree with Danny; this doc is useful and ready for publication.

BR, Pierrick


--- OLD ABSTRACT  -------------
A Logical Interface is a software semantic internal to the host
   operating system.  This semantic is available in all popular
   operating systems and is used in various protocol implementations.
   The Logical Interface support is required on the mobile node
  operating in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain, for leveraging various
   network-based mobility management features such as inter-technology
   handoffs, multihoming and flow mobility support.  This document
   explains the operational details of Logical Interface construct and
   the specifics on how the link-layer implementations hide the physical
   interfaces from the IP stack and from the network nodes on the
   attached access networks.  Furthermore, this document identifies the
   applicability of this approach to various link-layer technologies and
   analyzes the issues around it when used in context with various
   mobility management features.


-------------  NEW ABSTRACT -------------


A Logical Interface is a software semantic internal to the host

   operating system.  This semantic is available in all popular

   operating systems and, when the terminal is equipped with more than one interface, it can be used to hide the physical interfaces from the IP stack. The logical interface thus allows various

   network-based mobility management features such as inter-technology

   handoffs, multihoming and flow mobility support.  This document

   explains how the Logical Interface hides the physical

   interfaces from the IP stack and from the network nodes on the

   attached access networks.  Furthermore, this document identifies the

   applicability of this approach to various link-layer technologies and

   analyzes the issues around it when used in context with various

   mobility management features.



-          Old text -----------


Specifically, it explores the use of the Logical Interface support, a

   semantic available on most operating systems.



-          New text ----------

Specifically, it explores the use of the Logical Interface support, available on most operating systems.



Section 3.1:


« an 802.11 STA » - please expand STA


s/ within the same domain/ within the same IP subnet/



s/ the IEEE 802.11 MAC layer takes care of the mobility/ the IEEE 802.11 MAC layer handles mobility between access points



s/ A logical interface denotes a mechanism that that logically group/bond several/ A logical interface denotes a mechanism that logically group several



--------- OLD text ----------



Depending on the type of

      access technologies, it might be possible to use more than one

      physical interface at a time -- such that the node is

      simultaneously attached via different access technologies -- or

      just to perform handovers across a variety of physical interfaces.

.



Not: It does not depent on the access technology but on the OS and the terminal implementation, so I suggest:



----------- NEW text ----------



Depending on the system, it might be possible to use more than one

      physical interface at a time -- such that the node is

      simultaneously attached via different access technologies -- or

      just to perform handovers across a variety of physical interfaces.







------ OLD text ---------



The configuration is typically

      handled via a connection manager, and based on a combination of

      user preferences on one hand, and operator preferences such as

      those provisionned by the Access Network Discovery and Selection

      Function (ANDSF) [TS23402] on the other hand.





-------- NEW text --------



The configuration is typically

      handled via a connection manager, and based on a combination of

      user preferences, application characteristics, quality of communications, operator preferences (e.g. provisioned by the Access Network Discovery and Selection Function (ANDSF) [TS23402]), and so on.




S/3.2.1 link layer support/link layer mobility support/


s/ in the same subnet with a common IP layer configuration (DHCP server, default router, etc.)/ in the same IP subnet with a common configuration objects (DHCP server, default gateway, etc.)



s/ In this case the handover across access points need not to be hidden/ In this case the handover across access points does not need to be hidden






Last paragraph of 3.2.1 should be removed since the use-case is covered by 3.2.2. Or rewrite as:

-+-------- OLD TEXT ---------

Since this type of link layer technology does not typically allow for

   simultaneous attachment to different access networks of the same

   technology, the logical interface would not be used to provide
   simultaneous access for purposes of multihoming or flow mobility.

Note: actually, there is no multihoming or flow mobility since there is no more than one simultaneous attachment ;-)



   Instead, the logical interface can be used to provide inter-access

   technology handover between this type of link layer technology and

   another link layer technology, e.g., between IEEE 802.11 and IEEE

   802.16.

Note: this covered in the following section section ... this is the motivation of the logical interface....


-          NEW TEXT ----------


When the access technology does not allow a single interface to be simultaneous attach to more than one IP network (subnet and associated configuration objects), logical interface support is not required.

-------- OLD TEXT ---------


Doing so allows to hide inter-access

   technology handovers or application flow handovers across different

   physical interfaces.

--- NEW TEXT ------------


Doing so allows to hide inter-access

   technology handovers, or application flow handovers across different

   physical interfaces, from the IP stack which is by nature tight to a single interface.

-----------Question ---------------


Section 4 states:


In some UE implementations the wireless connection setup is based on

   creation of a PPP interface between the IP layer and the wireless

   modem that is configured with the IPCP and IPv6CP protocol [RFC5072].

   In this case the PPP interface does not have any L2 address assigned.

   In some other implementations the wireless modem is presented to the

   IP layer as a virtual Ethernet interface.


So what? What do you want to stress here?

-          - - -  ----


Section 5:


What do you mean by  "The sub-interfaces attached to a Logical interface are not visible to the IP and upper layers."

The node can use either the logical or physical interfaces, I mean, an application can be bound to the LI and another application bound to one of the physical interface available.








Section 5.1:


The IP layer should be configured with a default router reachable via the logical interface.



The IP layer should be also configured with DNS, DHCP server. Right?



Section 5.2:


In Fig.2 ::flow table :


s/ Physical_Intf_Id/PIF_ID

on section n 6.3: maybe add a reference to the draft netext-flow-mob?


General comment: In the doc, we find either « Logical Interface », or « logical interface », or « Logical interface ».... Would be better to pick only one of these terms....


De : netext [mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de Moses, Danny
Envoyé : jeudi 7 août 2014 17:44
À : [e-mail]
Objet : [netext] Logical Interface draft

Hi,

In the last meeting there was a discussion about whether or not to publish the 'Logical Interface' draft (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support/). At the end of the discussion it was agreed that if at least three new reviewers review the draft and state that it is useful, the WG will publish it.

Well, I reviewed it (and it was the first time for me to read it) and found the draft to be useful as a guide for OS developers (and/or network stack developers) who wish to implement a logical interface for supporting PMIPv6.

I found the draft to be clear, short and useful and recommend to publish it. I found a few minor typos that should be corrected  and sent my comments to Sri.

Regards,
        /Danny



---------------------------------------------------------------------
A member of the Intel Corporation group of companies

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.