Best regards.
Yong-Geun.
-----원본 메시지----- *From:* "marcelo bagnulo braun" <marcelo at it.uc3m.es>
*From Date:* 2009-01-28 오후 6:40:09 *To:* "Hong Yong-Geun"
<yghong at etri.re.kr> *Cc:* "mext at ietf.org" <mext at ietf.org>,
"mif at ietf.org" <mif at ietf.org>, "julien.laganier.IETF at googlemail.com"
<julien.laganier.IETF at googlemail.com>, "denghui02 at gmail.com"
<denghui02 at gmail.com> *Subject:* Re: Multiple interfaces problems in
MEXT and mif
Hi,
In the current MEXT charter there are several items about supporting
multiple interfaces, including the following two:
- A document explaining the motivations for a node using multiple
interfaces and the scenarios where it may end up with multiple global
addresses on its interfaces [Informational]
- An analysis document explaining what are the limitations for mobile
hosts using multiple simultaneous Care-of Addresses and Home Agent
addresses using Mobile IPv6, whether issues are specific to Mobile
IPv6 or not [Informational].
I think this is very similar to the scope of one of you documents at
least, so i would find very strange that the same work is chartered
in two different working groups.
Moreover, we do have wg documents for these two, but we find very
hard to find reviewers for those, which makes me think that there is
not much interest on these. So, if you find a more motivated crew to
do the work, that would be great, we can either do it in mext or
soemwhere else, if people feels that needs to be done, but that is
certainly not the feeling i am getting from the input in mext
Regards, marcelo
Hong Yong-Geun escribi?:
Hi, all in MEXT and mif.
In IETF mif (Multiple Interface) mailing list
(_https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif_
<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>),
we now discuss the host which would like to use multiple
interfaces.
I understand that MEXT WG is also related to the use of multiple
interfaces of a host using Mobile IPv6 or a mobile router using
NEMO Basic Support and their variants
MEXT WG is focuing on monami6 related topic (multiple CoA, Multiple
HoA, and Multple HA, etc.,) and extedning Mobile IPv6 and NEMO for
these, but mif is not related to this direction. In mif, source
address selection, routing and DNS control protocol are
consideration items due to multiple interfaces of a host.
For mif’s scope, Jari Arkko made some comments and classification
of problems.
_http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg00050.html_
Among these classification which includes access selection, split
DNS, configuration reconciliation, routing, address selection,
tunnel multihoming, and the communication way between the host and
the network about their policies regarding all of the above, Jari
said that access selection is already coverd in RFC 5113 and tunnel
multihoming is already covered in MEXT WG work items.
At monami6 WG in 64th IETF meetinng, I submitted and presented two
Internet Drafts.
- Analysis of multiple interfaces in a Mobile Node
_http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-multipleif-mn-pb-statement-00.txt_
- Virtual network interface for multiple interfaces in a Mobile
node using Mobile IPv6
_http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-virtualif-mn-mipv6-00.txt_
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hong-virtualif-mn-mipv6-00.txt>
Because these two drafts were not in the monami6 WG’s scope and
virtual network interface draft was
implementation specific, there were not adoped in monami6 WG’s work
items. The intentions of two drafts are supporting multiple
interfaces of a host without extending Mobile IPv6/NEMO.
I think that multiple interfaces problems of a host are related to
both Mobile IP/NEMO specific issues and general network issues.
Mobile IP/NEMO specific issues are related to extending of Mobile
IP/NEMO and these are already studied in MEXT WG and general
network issues which were not related to Mobile IP/NEMO could be
studied in mif. As same manner, I think that my drafts could be
discussed and developed in mif. In the first draft (Analysis
document), I classified multiple interface problems into Mobile
IPv6-sepcific issues, General network issues, and heterogeneous
environment issues.
Including Hui Deng in mif, with regarding to these drafts, they
want to hear comments from MEXT WG’s point of view, because it
seems that these drafts are quite related to monami6/MEXT WG. So, I
ask MEXT to review whether there are
some overlap between MEXT works and my drafts or not.
It is appreciate to give comments.
Best regards.
Yong-Geun.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ mif mailing list
mif at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
