Re: pmipv4 of WiMAX forum (Re: [Mip4] Questionaboutdraft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: pmipv4 of WiMAX forum (Re: [Mip4] Questionaboutdraft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode)



Hi Kent,

Thank you for your early reply.

I've understood your intention.
I'll wait for your updated draft.:)

Best Regards,
Jun

Kent Leung (kleung) wrote:
Let me clarify that we will be updating our draft,
draft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode, accordingly to address the gaps.

Kent

-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Leung (kleung) Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 9:29 AM
To: Jun AWANO; mip4
Subject: RE: pmipv4 of WiMAX forum (Re: [Mip4]
Questionaboutdraft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode)


Hi Jun.

We are working with WiMAX Forum members to address the technical gaps in
the draft.  Currently, we are collecting the review comments and will
update the draft accordingly.

Kent

-----Original Message-----
From: Jun AWANO [mailto:j-awano at az.jp.nec.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 7:23 PM
To: mip4
Subject: pmipv4 of WiMAX forum (Re: [Mip4] Question
aboutdraft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode)

Hi, kent

Please let me ask about your draft.

Your draft says,
"This document describes WiMAX Forum and 3GPP2 solution  for the base
Proxy Mobile IPv4 function which enables  another entity to provide
mobility support on behalf of  an unaltered and mobility-unaware IPv4
device."

But, I think that the PMIPv4 described in your draft seems different
from the one specified in WiMAX Forum spec (WiMAX Forum Network
Architechture stage2/3).

Do you plan to change the PMIPv4 spec of WiMAX Forum to match your
draft?

Best Regards,
Jun



--
-----------------------------------------------
Jun AWANO <j-awano at az.jp.nec.com>
NEC System Platforms Research Laboratories
Tel:+81 44 431 7638, FAX:+81 44 431 7609


-- 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/




Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.