 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the last IETF meeting there was agreement (to be confirmed on the list) for a number of new items to be added to the MIP4 charter and a few more things were left out because the WG has too many things to do. I do not think MIP4 is going anywhere for a while longer….
From: Behcet Sarikaya
[mailto:behcetsarikaya at yahoo.com]
Is there a netlmm4 WG? IMHO pmip4 could be standardized there if any? WGs can shut down if no new work left, and that is usually good practice, there is nothing wrong in doing such a thing. No offense to any one.
Regards,
--behcet
----- Original Message
---- Hi Kent,
I think it makes sense for the PMIPv4 protocol to be standardized by this group. I also think we should separate the way the protocol is used in the field from what the generic protocol is that might be applicable in various different systems. I think your draft is mixing the two issues together.
IMO we should have a very simple and hopefully sort specification defining the changes (if any) to MIPv4 required so that the protocol can run in proxy mode. In addition, if it is deemed necessary/useful, we can have informational document(s) showing how PMIPv4 is used in various systems.
I have some specific comments on the protocol itself but we can talk about that if/when this becomes a WG document.
Thanks George
From: Kent Leung
(kleung) [mailto:kleung at cisco.com]
Hi. The draft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode-01.txt draft describes using Mobile IPv4 in proxy mode to provide network-based mobility management. There will need to be some more work on the draft. But wanted to get some sense of support for Proxy Mobile IPv4 in this WG. Certainly there are a few SDOs which have either adopted or interested in such mechanism.
Do folks want to take this on as a WG item eventually?
Kent --
|
--
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/