Hi, > -----Original Message----- > I-D:draft-korhonen-netext-redirect as WG doc > > Hi, > > > > > > > Sure, but out-of-band mean is another vague method and > out of scope. > > > > > [Ahmad] > > Almost forgot about this ...... > > > > How the MAG would know when to send the re-registration for > a chance > > load balancing? By out-of-band signaling. > > Why Not using the same out-of-band to communicate the LMA address? > > Out-of-band signaling is vague and out of scope? > > hmm~ this is not my meaning. EITHER sending redirection > indiction OR providing r2LMA address to MAG is out-of-band > signaling, which can be regarded as another method to solve > maintenance operation. But this method is out of scope in this draft. [Ahmad] It seems we are going in a circle! You mentioned that this feature is needed for maintenance event and load balancing. NO? The argument, how this load balancing/maintenance feature relies on a re-registration which is by nature has nothing to do with maintenance and load balancing. You said, to inform the MAG that a re-registration is NEEDED you use an out-of-band signaling. see below from your earlier reply. " In addtion, LMA can notify MAG the maintenance operation by out-of-band means. " The question is: if in order to enable this feature you need an out-of-band signaling ANYWAY! Why NOT include the LMA address in the out-of-band signaling? You said because this out-of-band signaling is VAGUE and out-of-scope. Is that clear to you? My point is: this is a very interesting logic! Regards, Ahmad > > BR > Jinwei > > > > > Interesting logic. > > > > Regards, > > Ahmad > > > > > > > > > > >
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.