Subject: [dmm] DMM BOF

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:48:18 +0300

Folks,

There will not be a separate DMM BOF at IETF-79. However, we have 
reserved time in the MEXT meeting to discuss this topic.

In order to make that discussion most fruitful, here's some further 
guidance on how you should scope the discussion and what you should be 
working on before the meeting. The original BOF description had two 
parts, one that focused on operational advice on how to use existing 
protocols in as "flat" network model as possible, and another part which 
focused on creating new solutions. I think there are good technical 
reasons why a distributed model is interesting: potentially more shorter 
paths, elimination of overhead for non-moving nodes, less reliance on 
central nodes, etc. However, at this stage I do not yet see wide-spread 
demand for a completely new architecture, and I must confess that I'm 
not entirely happy about the deployment success of any IETF mobility 
solutions. So some care is needed so that we do not jump into creating 
new solutions without solid demand. However, I do recognize that a lot 
could be done within the existing frameworks. In particular, I would be 
interested in seeing how Mobile IP-based architecture can be used in a 
distributed manner. For instance, home agents could perhaps run more in 
the network edge devices than on some central nodes, helping eliminate 
unnecessary mobility signaling and tunnels for the many cases where the 
hosts are actually still in the area served by the edge device. To do 
this we need to look at many aspects:

- operational considerations of running home agent functionality on the 
edge devices
- discovery and bootstrapping of the suitable home agent
- using multiple home agents as you move around and retain sessions
- ...

Some of these items are operational, i.e., we only need to figure out 
how to use the existing protocols. Others may require protocol 
extensions. All of this should be in scope for the discussion at MEXT.

Thoughts, comments?

Jari

---

From: Hui Deng <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 22:18:43 +0800

does mext cover Proxy Mobile IPv6 or Hierarchical Mobile IP?

-Hui

2010/9/29 Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>

> Folks,
>
> There will not be a separate DMM BOF at IETF-79. However, we have reserved
> time in the MEXT meeting to discuss this topic.
>
> working on before the meeting. The original BOF description had two parts,
> one that focused on operational advice on how to use existing protocols in
> as "flat" network model as possible, and another part which focused on
> creating new solutions. I think there are good technical reasons why a
> distributed model is interesting: potentially more shorter paths,
> elimination of overhead for non-moving nodes, less reliance on central
> nodes, etc. However, at this stage I do not yet see wide-spread demand for a
> completely new architecture, and I must confess that I'm not entirely happy
> about the deployment success of any IETF mobility solutions. So some care is
> needed so that we do not jump into creating new solutions without solid
> demand. However, I do recognize that a lot could be done within the existing
> frameworks. In particular, I would be interested in seeing how Mobile
> IP-based architecture can be used in a distributed manner. For instance,
> home agents could perhaps run more in the network edge devices than on some
> central nodes, helping eliminate unnecessary mobility signaling and tunnels
> for the many cases where the hosts are actually still in the area served by
> the edge device. To do this we need to look at many aspects:
>
> Some of these items are operational, i.e., we only need to figure out how
> to use the existing protocols. Others may require protocol extensions. All
> of this should be in scope for the discussion at MEXT.
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
> Jari
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 18:36:07 +0300

> does mext cover Proxy Mobile IPv6 or Hierarchical Mobile IP?

For the sake of this discussion, I think we can deal with the entire set 
of Mobile IPv6 based protocols.

Jari