Re: Why is PMIP a superior solution for NETLMM requireiments?(was:Re:[netlmm] Network-based mobility -NETLMMDT SolutionVsAsolutionbased on MIP6)
Basavaraj Patil <basavaraj.patil@nokia.com> Tue, 31 October 2006 16:21 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GewMY-0005XK-0n; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:21:18 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GewMT-0005X8-Mr for netlmm@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:21:16 -0500
Received: from mgw-ext14.nokia.com ([131.228.20.173]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GewMP-00082O-5C for netlmm@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:21:13 -0500
Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext14.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.10/Switch-3.1.10) with ESMTP id k9VGKkpi010142; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:20:55 +0200
Received: from daebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.111]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:20:35 +0200
Received: from daebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.113]) by daebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:20:24 -0600
Received: from 172.19.244.134 ([172.19.244.134]) by daebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.113]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 16:20:25 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:22:39 -0600
Subject: Re: Why is PMIP a superior solution for NETLMM requireiments?(was:Re:[netlmm] Network-based mobility -NETLMMDT SolutionVsAsolutionbased on MIP6)
From: Basavaraj Patil <basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
To: "ext Soliman, Hesham" <hsoliman@qualcomm.com>, "Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com>, Vijay Devarapalli <vijay.devarapalli@azairenet.com>, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Message-ID: <C16CD46F.27807%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: Why is PMIP a superior solution for NETLMM requireiments?(was:Re:[netlmm] Network-based mobility -NETLMMDT SolutionVsAsolutionbased on MIP6)
Thread-Index: Acb8qr9iTltb0nmeRtWY1eF1lsRM0AAGNzggAAVu9IAAC9wTUw==
In-Reply-To: <2309978910A6A6478C2C7585692B0AF40151DA@NAEX16.na.qualcomm.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Oct 2006 16:20:24.0780 (UTC) FILETIME=[786098C0:01C6FD08]
X-eXpurgate-Category: 1/0
X-eXpurgate-ID: 149371::061031182056-277D2BB0-0B59B5A4/0-0/0-1
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336
Cc: netlmm@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: netlmm-bounces@ietf.org
Heck... As long as it is a counter I might add and say: ++ (as well) -Raj On 10/31/06 4:43 AM, "ext Soliman, Hesham" <hsoliman@qualcomm.com> wrote: > +1 > > Hesham > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Narayanan, Vidya [mailto:vidyan@qualcomm.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 7:37 PM >> To: Vijay Devarapalli; Templin, Fred L >> Cc: netlmm@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: Why is PMIP a superior solution for NETLMM >> requireiments?(was:Re:[netlmm] Network-based mobility >> -NETLMMDT SolutionVsAsolutionbased on MIP6) >> >> >> At the last couple of IETFs, we have discussed this quite a >> bit, but the >> topic seems to be coming up again. In my view, the use of >> network-based >> mobility for anything other than local mobility is bad. >> Global mobility >> management is meant to deal with mobility across heterogeneous >> interfaces and mobility across administrative domains. Network-based >> mobility solutions have inherent problems with such scenarios. Just >> because PMIPv6 is based on MIP6 does not mean that it >> automatically has >> the same scope as MIP6. IMHO, NETLMM and PMIP6 are solving the same >> problem and suffer from exactly the same limitations in terms of >> applicability. >> >> As many would recall, we had a discussion in Dallas on network-based >> global mobility and talked about why it is a bad idea. As >> far as I know, >> nothing has happened to change that view. >> >> Regards, >> Vidya >> _______________________________________________ netlmm mailing list netlmm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm
- RE: Why is PMIP a superior solution for NETLMM re… Soliman, Hesham
- Re: Why is PMIP a superior solution for NETLMM re… Basavaraj Patil