Re: [Seamoby] proposal on next steps in paging

Hi Marco,
  There is a very important issue with the way paging protocol assessment
was concluded, i.e. one of the candidate proposals was not eliminated in a
way which is not acceptable. As I said in one of my previous emails, the
assessment result is moot.
  I do not we can proceed without this issue being resolved satisfactorily.

  Regards,

Marco Liebsch wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> in order to proceed with DMHA protocol specification, I propose the
> following:
> Since the current base-line document is maybe a bit overloaded for being
> the first Seamoby WG draft, I will take out the Mobile IPv6 specific
> options out of the main part, but keep the generic explicit signaling in
> the document. Mobile IPv6 specific optimization could be kept in the
> documents annex or in a separate document (what do you think?).
> Furthermore, my opinion is that the concept should allow deployment of
> several paging strategies, as currently described in the draft. But
> maybe it is reasonable to extract the sections on paging strategies out
> of the current draft keeping them in a separate document, which could be
> further evaluated and extended. This would allow to get a first
> framework draft, which is clearly arranged and open for further
> specification of open issues.
> What about the following:
> Coming up with a first famework draft end of January, possibly having
> some further ideas and issues already addressed by then. Then we have
> about one month in order to prepare a second version ready for
> submission right in time for IETF#53.
>
> First issues to be addressed with respect to the base-line concept
> should be the issues described in the assessment draft. Maybe this is a
> good starting point for proceeding. As mentioned in Salt Lake already,
> all protocol proposals have very good ideas, which should be discussed
> and considered to be folded into a common WG DMHA protocol draft.
> Comments are appreciated.
>
> I am looking forward to working with you all on bringing the DMHA
> protocol specification ahead.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marco
>
> _______________________________________________
> Seamoby mailing list
> Seamoby@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby

--
Behcet

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