Subject: Document Action: 'Network Mobility Route Optimization Problem Statement' to Informational RFC

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:24:03 -0500

The IESG has approved the following documents:

- 'Network Mobility Route Optimization Problem Statement '
   <draft-ietf-nemo-ro-problem-statement-03.txt> as an Informational RFC
- 'Network Mobility Route Optimization Solution Space Analysis '
   <draft-ietf-nemo-ro-space-analysis-03.txt> as an Informational RFC

These documents are products of the Network Mobility Working Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Jari Arkko and Mark Townsley.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nemo-ro-problem-statement-03.txt

Technical Summary
 
  With current Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support, all
  communications to and from Mobile Network Nodes must go 
  through the bi-directional tunnel established between 
  the Mobile Router and Home Agent when the mobile network
  is away. The problem-statement document studies the effects
  of this non-optimized routing on communication.

  The space-analysis document takes the existing Route Optimization
  solution proposals and considers various aspects such as protocol    
  complexity, scalability, privacy, and security.
 
Working Group Summary
 
  These documents are informative references, and intended
  to introduce the reader to Route Optimization for NEMO 
  scenarios. The document was written by authors from various
  backgrounds, with the extensive help and review of the NEMO
  working group.
 
Protocol Quality
 
  Jari Arkko has reviewed this specification for the IESG.

Note to RFC Editor
 
  In ro-problem appendix B, change "This mean that not
  only can they not move around keeping open connections,
  but also they cannot process Binding Updates sent by peers"
  to "This means that they cannot move around keeping
  open connections and that they cannot process Binding
  Updates sent by peers".

  In the ro-space-analysis document, change

    Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA) [40] could be used to
    establish the ownership of care-of addresses and network prefixes

  to

    Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA) [40] could be used to
    establish the ownership of care-of addresses

  In the ro-space-analysis document, expand the term "MRHA"
  in the abstract.

_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce