Subject: [DMM] Mirja Kühlewind's Abstain on draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-14: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 06:42:53 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-14: Abstain

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While I think the content of this document is fine and I'm sure it was valuable
to has this written down as basis for potentially on-going working group
discussion, I don't see a value in publishing this document in a (separate) RFC.

Further I don't see a milestone covering this document in the dmm charter.
There is a bullet point on "Distributed mobility management deployment models
and scenarios" however that does not mean that this has to be documented in
potentially multiple RFCs. There is also draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models with
a quite central reference in the document, however, this draft is expired for
more than a year. What's the plan here?

In any case, thanks for quickly addressing the TSV-ART review (and Yoshi thanks
for the review!)!