Re: [Seamoby] Confirmation of Concensus on Completing Seamoby Work

Extending the semantics is the proposal. Or, alternatively, delivering the
learning-based information via a RS.

If it turns out not to be a good match, then an additional message could be
added for the learning based approach.

            jak

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eunsoo Shim" <eunsoo@nec-labs.com>
To: "James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>; <seamoby@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Seamoby] Confirmation of Concensus on Completing Seamoby Work

> FMIP PrxyRtSol/SolPrxyRtAdv are just for delivering the CAR information
> after discovery.
> In Dycard, the discovery requires messages between MN and AR for delivering
> the IP address of the previous AR to the current AR. This is beyond the
> purpose of FMIP PrxyRtSol/SolPrxyRtAdv messages.
> I wonder whether the proposal is to extend the semantics of FMIP
> PrxyRtSol/SolPrxyRtAdv for all the necessary signaling messages between AR
> and MN for CARD.
>
> Eunsoo
>
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > This email is to confirm the concensus at the IETF 56 meeting to proceed
> toward
> > completing the Seamoby work and closing the Working Group. This email also
> > advances proposals for a couple of other issues that were not discussed at
> the
> > meeting but are required to close out Seamoby.
> >
> > CARD:
> >       - Drop draft-ietf-seamoby-card-requirements-02.txt.
> >       - Take draft-ietf-seamoby-card-protocol-01.txt to Experimental
> rather than
> >          Proposed Standard
> >       - Use FMIP PrxyRtSol/SolPrxyRtAdv as transport for CARD information
> on
> >         AR-MN interface. Consult with FMIP draft editor about best way to
> do
> > this..
> >       - Complete protocol on AR-AR interface that will support both
> learning
> > based
> >          and server based approaches.
> >       - Protocol design complete by IETF 57 in Vienna.
> >
> > CT:
> >
> >     - Drop draft-ietf-seamoby-ct-reqs-05.txt.
> >     - Take draft-ietf-seamobyh-ctp-01.txt to Experimental rather than
> >        Proposed Standard.
> >     - Complete protocol design by IETF 57 in Vienna.
> >
> > We did not discuss the following issues, here they are with some
> suggestions:
> > about how to resolve them
> >
> >     - What to do with draft-ietf-seamoby-cardiscovery-issues-04.txt.
> >        Since a clear statement of the problem is necessary for formulating
> >        the research questions, continue to advance this document to
> >        Informational.
> >
> >     - Relationship between CT and FMIP. Since the purpose of
> >       Seamoby is to support fast handover, focus on a design
> >       that integrated well with FMIP signaling.
> >
> > Discussion?
> >
> >             jak
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Seamoby mailing list
> > Seamoby@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
> >
>
>

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby