Subject: [netlmm] #69: Need to include gap analysis for IGP/BGP + tunnel

From: netlmm-tracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:02:22 -0000

#69: Need to include gap analysis for IGP/BGP + tunnel
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]      |       Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                        |      Status:  new                     
 Priority:  major                         |   Milestone:  milestone2              
Component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-req  |     Version:  1.0                     
 Keywords:  REQ draft                     |  
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Pekka Savola writes:

 6) I didn't read the appendix except for section 9.5, and it has the same
 issues which were already brought up earlier.  There's also no discussion
 of
 combined IGP/BGP + a tunnel.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://www1.tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/trac/ticket/69>
netlmm <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/>

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

---

From: netlmm-tracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:05:04 -0000

#69: Need to include gap analysis for IGP/BGP + tunnel
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
  Reporter:  [email-masked]      |       Owner:  [email-masked]
      Type:  defect                        |      Status:  closed                  
  Priority:  major                         |   Milestone:  milestone2              
 Component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-req  |     Version:  1.0                     
Resolution:  invalid                       |    Keywords:  REQ draft               
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Changes (by [email-masked]):

  * resolution:  => invalid
  * status:  new => closed

Comment:

 Pekka's comment on the PS draft seemed to indicate that this solution
 would require additional protocol to propagate mobile node movement
 information, therefore, it doesn't constitute an existing solution. The
 gap analysis is only intended for solutions where no new protocol is
 required.