RE: [Seamoby] state of the IP micromobility protocols

john.loughney@nokia.com Thu, 15 January 2004 11:55 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA29254 for <seamoby-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:55:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah654-00086N-4U for seamoby-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:54:34 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0FBsY99031137 for seamoby-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:54:34 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah653-000868-WA for seamoby-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:54:34 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA29204 for <seamoby-web-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:54:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah64z-00017h-00 for seamoby-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:54:29 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah63j-0000sM-00 for seamoby-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:53:12 -0500
Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah62Y-0000ef-00 for seamoby-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:51:58 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah62a-0007om-3C; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:52:00 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah62X-0007oa-Ud for seamoby@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:51:57 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA28974 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:51:53 -0500 (EST)
From: john.loughney@nokia.com
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah62T-0000dZ-00 for seamoby@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:51:53 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah5y5-0000JT-00 for seamoby@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:47:22 -0500
Received: from mgw-x4.nokia.com ([131.228.20.27]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah5vq-00006G-00 for seamoby@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:45:03 -0500
Received: from esvir04nok.ntc.nokia.com (esvir04nokt.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.36]) by mgw-x4.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i0FBic205848 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:44:38 +0200 (EET)
Received: from esebh004.NOE.Nokia.com (unverified) by esvir04nok.ntc.nokia.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id <T67262f7d11ac158f24072@esvir04nok.ntc.nokia.com>; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:44:37 +0200
Received: from esebe023.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.115]) by esebh004.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:44:37 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Seamoby] state of the IP micromobility protocols
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:44:36 +0200
Message-ID: <DADF50F5EC506B41A0F375ABEB320636D44BD4@esebe023.ntc.nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: [Seamoby] state of the IP micromobility protocols
Thread-Index: AcPbWPvjpPWaCmALTg64oKdYVkbM9wAAl26g
To: hecker@enst.fr, seamoby@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jan 2004 11:44:37.0739 (UTC) FILETIME=[F43983B0:01C3DB5C]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: seamoby@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby>, <mailto:seamoby-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Context Transfer, Handoff Candidate Discovery, and Dormant Mode Host Alerting <seamoby.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:seamoby@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:seamoby-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby>, <mailto:seamoby-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Artur,

> at the IRTF's home page i can only see the mail list discussions. is 
> there some kind of repository for documents, or do the people still use 
> this strange draft-concept of the IETF? :-)

Much of the information had been published as internet drafts.

> > I'd like to add to this point.  It seems that there was much interest
> > in micromobity before the popping of the Internet/telecom bubble.  Recently,
> > most of the interest in the topic has gone.  At present, I don't see
> > much driving the need for micromobility, however if there is significant
> > interest in the topic, I'd be interested hearing it.
> 
> i'd immediately agree that at the moment it's a better problem for the 
> IRTF than for the IETF. what i don't get is the real reason why the 
> interest has gone. john, could you perhaps explain your point with other 
> than financial reasons? those are quite evident; however, public 
> research usually does not care a lot about the commercial applicability 
> (see e.g. the years of L3 multicast research :)) as long as 
> there are ideas.

Some of the interest in micromobility was based upon the assumption
that the demand for mobile data was greater than what it currently is.
Many of the solutions using L2 mobility seem to be sufficient at the
moment.  This leads to a general assumption that macromobility may
be sufficient in the near-term.  The IETF is geared towards solving
near-term problems, and this is why (IMO) macromobility is enough.

> my problem is the following: i would like to work on IP micromobility 
> protocols because i personally tend to think that there are a lot of 
> unresolved questions (e.g. in the security area). but it perturbs me to 
> see that "the interest is gone" - that was also my own observation in 
> the original mail. so, why has it gone generally? (not specifically in 
> the IETF.) (i understand that this list is perhaps not the 
> best place to ask, sorry).

Why is the interest gone?  Probably because the funding is gone.  But I would
note that the IP Mobility Optimizations work in the IRTF may be a good place to
look at some of the issues.

http://www.irtf.org/charters/mobopts.html

> lets periphrase: can i still publish on IP micromobility if i have some 
> interesting points/results or would everybody just laugh? :-)

Of course, though the SeaMoby WG is in the process of trying shutting down.

John

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