Re: [netlmm] Some comments // RE: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery-05

[Xiangsong Cui <[e-mail]>]

I don't think so.
As I said in my earlier mail, I think there is some circulation on RFC5149
reference.

RFC5149 reads,
   This document describes a Service Selection Mobility Option for
   Mobile IPv6 that is intended to *assist home agents* to make specific
   service selections for the mobility service subscription **during the
   binding registration procedure.**

I think this is clear enough, RFC5149 is "assist HA ... during registration
procedure", right?
While in this draft, we are talking about "assist LMA-discoverer to select a
LMA, before registration procedure", right?

How can we mix them together?

Desired service may be used for purpose A, and may be used for purpose B,
but this not means A and B *MUST* be free to be cross-referenced, imho.
So I agree LMA-discovery refer on desired service, and I disagree
LMA-discovery refer on RFC5149.
And I am open for any clarification on desired service, if it is not clear.

Xiangsong


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vijay Devarapalli [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 1:40 AM
> To: jouni korhonen
> Cc: Xiangsong Cui; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [netlmm] Some comments // RE: Fwd: New Version Notification
for
> draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery-05
> 
> On 9/16/10 2:44 AM, jouni korhonen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Inline..
> >
> > On Sep 16, 2010, at 12:12 PM, Xiangsong Cui wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, I have no problem of removing RFC5149 reference if that is
> >> offending.
> >>> It only appeared in -04 version of this draft.
> >>
> >> I prefer "selecting a LMA based on desired services." Thanks!
> >
> > Ok. Good.
> 
> No, this is too vague. It is hard for someone not familiar with 3GPP to
> figure out what it means to select LMA based on the services desired.
> Service specific mobility anchor points are very 3GPP specific. So I
> think we should have the reference to RFC 5149. That RFC clearly
> explains what a "service" means in addition to defining a new mobility
> option. I think you should put back this reference.
> 
> Vijay