IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netlmm] Consensus call: PMIP6 IPv4 support change

jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Sun, 24 January 2010 11:03 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EBBA3A65A6 for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 03:03:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001]
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 WnzA2zHop0wG for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 03:03:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi [195.197.172.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52E283A6359 for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 03:03:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a88-114-70-12.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-70-12.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.70.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039B91396FE; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 13:03:21 +0200 (EET)
References: <C7763D2C.A0DD6%jonne.soininen@nsn.com> <1FCAE7B6027FE3489B8497A060C704C41F60F0E57C@EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se>, <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1C677B024C@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com> <1FCAE7B6027FE3489B8497A060C704C41F60F0E5A8@EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <1FCAE7B6027FE3489B8497A060C704C41F60F0E5A8@EUSAACMS0714.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <2EA867FA-7863-4250-ADBA-915614EB9907@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 13:03:21 +0200
To: Ahmad Muhanna <ahmad.muhanna@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
Cc: "Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com>, "netlmm@ietf.org" <netlmm@ietf.org>, Pasi Eronen <pasi.eronen@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [netlmm] Consensus call: PMIP6 IPv4 support change
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:03:29 -0000

Hi,


On Jan 23, 2010, at 9:49 AM, Ahmad Muhanna wrote:

[snip]

> 
> 
> I look at the proposed changes as a nice enhancement to enable PMIP6 signaling over IPv4 transport smoothly while enabling the option of having IPsec terminates at another box. Nice and clean.

I can second this. You could achieve this way of functioning with based PMIPv6, so having it on IPv4 transport is imho beneficial.

Cheers,
	Jouni



> 
> Additionally, we just agreed that there are few differences between DSMIP6 and PMIP6. I do not see a problem in PMIP6 differs in this piece too.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Ahmad
> _______________________

[snap]

v2.38.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status