[Seamoby] Removing CT Requirements

"James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com> Fri, 04 January 2002 17:45 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA09438 for <seamoby-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2002 12:45:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA00600; Fri, 4 Jan 2002 12:33:38 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA00571 for <seamoby@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2002 12:33:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from docomolabs-usa.com (fridge.docomo-usa.com [216.98.102.228]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA09192 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2002 12:33:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from T23KEMPF (dhcp126.docomo-usa.com [172.21.96.126]) by docomolabs-usa.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g04HWtS06903; Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:32:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <007401c19545$9f2f3e00$7e6015ac@T23KEMPF>
From: James Kempf <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>
To: Gary Kenward <gkenward@nortelnetworks.com>, George Tsirtsis <G.Tsirtsis@flarion.com>
Cc: seamoby@ietf.org
References: <9FBD322B7824D511B36900508BF93C9C01AA473B@zcard031.ca.nortel.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 09:31:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Seamoby] Removing CT Requirements
Sender: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Context Transfer, Handoff Candidate Discovery, and Dormant Mode Host Alerting <seamoby.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: seamoby@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

It seems to me like George is making a specific request as part of the
WG last call that the following
requirements be removed from the document:

4.12 The context information to be transferred MUST be available at the
AR performing the transfer, prior to the initiation of a given phase of
the context transfer.
4.13 The context transfer solution WILL NOT verify the context
information prior to transfer.
4.15 The context transfer solution MAY include methods for interworking
with non-IETF mobility solutions.
5.5.2 A context update MUST preserve the integrity, and thus the
meaning, of the context at each receiving AR."


based on their being impossible to interpret meaningfully in an
implementation and deployment context or to their being obvious.

Rather than spend another week exchanging email on this topic, I'd like
to ask the WG at this time if there
is anyone else who feels that one or several of these requirements
should be removed before we send this document to the IESG?

                jak


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