Subject: Re: [netlmm] Scenarios for PMIP-MIP interactions

From: "Damic, Damjan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 16:05:28 +0100

Hi Vidya, Gerardo,

We've been motivated to investigate and propose solution to PMIP6-MIP6
interactions (in scope of a certain SDO).
[Informatively, our work is published under
draft-damic-netlmm-pmip6-ind-discover-03]
By far, it was not the sole proposal up for discussion (though, those
otheres may not be directly available).
So, one could probably say there is a certain level of interest in this
matter.

In reply to Gerardo's initial mail:
Strictly considering use case classification in
draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions-02, guess our approach would
categorize under scenario B.
However, we believe that mechanisms proposed therein apply to both
scenario A, and C as well.
We tried keeping all three cases in scope, finding them equally probable
deployment options.

Thanks, and kind regards.
Damjan

>From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
>Subject: Re: [netlmm] Scenarios for PMIP-MIP interactions
>To: "Narayanan, Vidya" <[email-masked]>
>Cc: [email-masked]
>
>Hi Vidya,
>
>AFAIK, all three scenarios have folks interested in using and
>deploying them. In the IETF, we need to document the issues,
>if any, for each of these scenarios and explain how each of
>the scenarios are supposed to work.
>
>Vijay
>
>Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
>> Folks,
>> For the benefit of the people on the list, could someone 
>please send a
>> justification of all the scenarios to the mailing list?  
>I've heard it
>> offline, but it would be good to have that sent to the list to jump
>> start the discussion.  Simply saying that we need to work on these
>> without a discussion of the need for the scenarios is not useful.  
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Vidya
>> 
_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm