Scott Brim a ?crit :
> Excerpts from marcelo bagnulo braun on Thu, Jan 29, 2009 09:09:55PM
> +0100:
>> makes sense to me
>>
>> Marc Blanchet escribi?:
>>> to me, the main difference is that the 'multiple interface' issue
>>> is not bound to mobility, and more specifically to mobility
>>> protocols (mobileIPv4, mobileipv6, nemo, ...).
>>>
>>> Therefore, the MIF work is not scoping about mobility protocols and
>>> shall not require mobility protocols.
>>>
>>> I would see that if some part of the MIF work is looking at the
>>> mobility protocols, then these should be then "transfered" to MEXT.
>
> Even without mobility considerations, the issue of how to handle
> multiple interfaces overlaps with IntArea, RRG, and Behave (those are
> the ones I can think of offhand). Have you seen the arguments, for
> example, about session initialization when multiple addresses can be
> in play simultaneously at both ends? I apologize but I still don't
> understand the MIF boundaries.
of course, there is overlap, as most IETF issues and work span over
multiple groups.
to me, the question in hand is the following:
a) do we think this is a "real" problem
b) if yes, then what should we do with it.
c) if what = possible wg, then write charter, ...
to me, a) and b) are clearly subject of the BOF. c) depends on the
outcome of the BOF.
Looking at the various comments over the past weeks, it might be good
that we (the initial proposers or anyone I shall say) should write a
possible wg charter based on the discussions. We might then define the
scope and the out of scope...
Marc.
>
> Thanks ... Scott
--
=========
IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
DTN news service: http://reeves.viagenie.ca
_______________________________________________
mif mailing list
mif at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
_______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list MEXT at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext