Re: [netlmm] About the Agenda for the meeting - your input is needed

["Soininen Jonne (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I think what Raj proposes makes sense and I will start the discussion 
with the radext chairmen.

Cheers,

Jonne.
ext Basavaraj Patil wrote:
> The reason why MIP6 tool on the radius extensions work was because the
> chairs believed that most of the competence for the work was in the MIP6 WG.
> Radext chairs were okay with working on it as a joint WG document and ensure
> that the last call and reviews are done by both WGs.
>
> In the case of Netlmm as well, I think it would be best to consult with the
> Radext chairs their opinion about the work being done as a Netlmm/Radext
> joint WG I-D. 
>
> -Raj 
>
>
> On 3/3/08 12:41 PM, "ext Vijay Devarapalli"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>   
>> Frank Xia wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi Jonne
>>>
>>> I am following the practice in  MEXT in which RADIUS draft  is included
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/mext/draft-ietf-mip6-radius/.
>>>
>>> IMO, it makes sense.
>>>       
>> Not necessarily. I don't remember why we decided that the RADIUS
>> extensions had to be done in the MIP6 WG. Maybe RADEXT didn't
>> have the bandwidth for this work. Raj, do you remember?
>>
>> That shouldn't be the reason why the NETLMM WG should standardize
>> the RADIUS extensions for PMIPv6.
>>
>> Having said, I do think that we should work on the RADIUS
>> extensions somewhere.
>>
>> Vijay
>>
>>     
>>> BR
>>> Frank
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Soininen Jonne (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>
>>> To: "ext Frank Xia" <[e-mail]>
>>> Cc: <[e-mail]>
>>> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 9:14 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [netlmm] About the Agenda for the meeting - your input is needed
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Frank,
>>>>
>>>> I thought radius extensions would rather be at radext WG than in netlmm.
>>>> This would then be in line with dime and the diameter work as well.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Jonne.
>>>> ext Frank Xia wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> Hi Soininen
>>>>>
>>>>> I think  that "RADIUS Proxy Mobile IPv6" is another topic to consider for
>>>>> rechartering.
>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/draft-xia-netlmm-radius-02.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> It is necessary mechanism when deploying PMIPv6 using RADIUS as AAA
>>>>> protocol.
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact, the corresponding document, Diamter Proxy Mobile IPv6, is also
>>>>> being 
>>>>> discussed  as a rechartering item in DIME WG.
>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/draft-korhonen-dime-pmip6-03.txt.
>>>>>
>>>>> BR
>>>>> Frank
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>
>>>>> To: <[e-mail]>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:34 PM
>>>>> Subject: [netlmm] About the Agenda for the meeting - your input is needed
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello everybody,
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't have the possibility before today to combine the agenda, though I
>>>>> kind of knew what to expect. I think we have a problem for which I would
>>>>> like to ask for your help.
>>>>>
>>>>> First of all the proposed skeleton is the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> Network-based Local Mobility Management (NetLMM)
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> TUESDAY, March 11, 2008
>>>>> 0900-1130 Morning Session I
>>>>>
>>>>> Chairs: 
>>>>> Jonne Soininen <[e-mail]>
>>>>> Vidya Narayanan <[e-mail]>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> PRELIMINARIES
>>>>> Agenda review
>>>>> Blue sheets
>>>>> Notes and Jabber scribe
>>>>> WG status
>>>>>
>>>>> WG DRAFT DISCUSSIONS
>>>>>
>>>>> Topic: Proxy Mobile IPv6
>>>>> Draft: draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6-11.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> Topic: IPv4 Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6
>>>>> Draft: draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-02.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> Topic: Interface between a Proxy MIPv6 Mobility Access Gateway and a Mobile
>>>>> Node
>>>>> Draft: draft-ietf-netlmm-mn-ar-if-03
>>>>>
>>>>> POSSIBLE NEW WORK ITEMS
>>>>>
>>>>> Presentations of the possible new work items
>>>>>
>>>>> RECHARTERING DISCUSSIONS
>>>>>
>>>>> NEXT STEPS and WRAP UP
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> So we have basically 2.5 hours to spend, and we _have to_ discuss the
>>>>> current WG drafts, and get to understand what are we doing going forward.
>>>>> The emphasis of the work has to be on these two things.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have listed the following requests for presentations (the order is not
>>>>> important):
>>>>>
>>>>> -Multiple Interface Support with PMIPv6 (15 Min) - Vijay
>>>>>  (draft-devarapalli-netlmm-multihoming-02.txt)
>>>>>
>>>>> -PMIPv6 Heartbeat Mechanism (10 Min) - Vijay
>>>>>  (draft-devarapalli-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-01.txt)
>>>>>
>>>>> -PMIPv6 and MIPv4 interactions (10 min) - Vijay
>>>>>
>>>>> -Multihoming Scenarios (10 min) - Ahmad
>>>>>
>>>>> -GRE keying (5 min) - Ahmad
>>>>>
>>>>> -Route Optimization (10 min) - Christian
>>>>>
>>>>> -Inter-MAG Route Optimization (10 min) Ashutosh
>>>>>
>>>>> -Inter-technology handover extensions (10 min) - Marco
>>>>>
>>>>> -PMIPv6 support Transient CoA Registration (10 min) - Ahmad
>>>>>  draft-muhanna-netlmm-pmipv6-support-transient-coa-00.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> -Proxy Network Mobility (10 Min) - John
>>>>>
>>>>> -Secondary Binding Cache Entries for PMIP (10 min) - Oliver
>>>>>  draft-blume-netlmm-secondary-bce-proxymip6ho-00.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> -Multiple interface support (10 min) - Mohana
>>>>>  draft-jeyatharan-netlmm-multi-interface-ps-01.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> -Proxy Mobile IPv6 indication and discovery (10 min) - Basavaraj
>>>>> draft-damic-netlmm-pmip6-ind-discover-03.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> And I'm pretty sure I forgot something (please remind me if I did).
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that this does not really fit. We cannot have all of these
>>>>> presentations and accomplish our main goal of the meeting. So, I think we
>>>>> have to compress and rethink the presentations.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I see some patterns/groups (again the order is not of importance):
>>>>>
>>>>> Interaction
>>>>>  -PMIP6-MIP4
>>>>>  -PMIP6-MIP6 (presented in earlier meeting)
>>>>>
>>>>> Multiple interface support/Multihoming
>>>>>  -Vijay
>>>>>  -Mohana
>>>>>  -Ahmad
>>>>>  -Marco?
>>>>>
>>>>> Route Optimization
>>>>>  -Christian
>>>>>  -Ashutosh
>>>>>
>>>>> Multiple COA Registration
>>>>>  -Ahmad
>>>>>  -Oliver
>>>>>
>>>>> Others
>>>>>  -GRE keying (Ahmad)
>>>>>  -Heart Beat (Vijay)
>>>>>  -PMIP indication and discovery (Basavaraj)
>>>>>
>>>>> Could we do some grouping here or cooperation to get the different problems
>>>>> areas at least presented? In addition, I would think it would be good to
>>>>> get
>>>>> the items presented that it seems our "customers" like 3GPP, 3GPP2, and
>>>>> Wimax Forum expect us to get done. I think this is extremely important
>>>>> input
>>>>> for the rechartering discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas or suggestions?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jonne.
>>>>>
>>>>> PS. I think we will let only the people enter the meeting room who have
>>>>> commented/reviewed the remaining WG items we have in the current charter...
>>>>> ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> PS/2: Any volunteers for Jabber scribes and minute takers?
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>           
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netlmm mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> netlmm mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> netlmm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm
>   

_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm