From philippe.bertin@orange-ftgroup.com Tue May 3 07:52:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41289E080F; Tue, 3 May 2011 07:52:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1HX7BNr8c5oo; Tue, 3 May 2011 07:52:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05304E06B5; Tue, 3 May 2011 07:52:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id EC23C85800A; Tue, 3 May 2011 16:58:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF0E5858007; Tue, 3 May 2011 16:58:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 3 May 2011 16:50:14 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 16:50:12 +0200 Message-ID: <8E09C72DBC577D489F13A71228C0B7BF02552A87@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> In-Reply-To: <006801cbe9a8$7656d210$33097c0a@china.huawei.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: MMFN 2011 (WPMC workshop) Approaching Deadline Thread-Index: AQHL3aWHdcznOQCGykW+F1PZt+4kmpQ7gJgggAAURjCAP/IqgA== References: <006801cbe9a8$7656d210$33097c0a@china.huawei.com> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 May 2011 14:50:14.0329 (UTC) FILETIME=[69060A90:01CC09A1] Subject: [MEXT] MMFN 2011 (WPMC workshop) Approaching Deadline X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 14:52:05 -0000 [We apologize if you receive multiple copies of this message] -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------------------------------------------------------------ Call for papers MMFN 2011 International Workshop on Mobility Management for Flat Networks 6 October 2011 (date to be confirmed) In conjunction with the 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communication - WPMC 2011 www.wpmc2011.org 3-6 October, 2011 Brest, France Technically co-sponsored by IEEE ComSoc, IEEE Section France and SEE CFP available on = http://www.wpmc2011.org/Call_for_papers_MMFN_2011-591-0-0-0.html GOALS FOR THE WORKSHOP ---------------------- Cellular networks architectures rely on hierarchical and centralised = mobility anchoring functions tracking mobile nodes location and = movements while supporting mobile traffic management and indirections. = It is now recognized that such approaches lead to scalability issues = like the creation of networks bottlenecks in central mobility anchoring = functions as well as efficiency issues in cascading several per-user = traffic encapsulation/de-capsulation functions. Hence, with the = exponential growth in mobile data services usage, scalability and = quality of service issues are foreseen even if most of users are not on = the move while communicating. Considering the current trend in flattening networks architectures, new = means of supporting mobility can be envisaged in a more distributed and = dynamic fashion. Such considerations include end-hosts and network = schemes. In end-hosts schemes, mobility is provided at end-hosts level only, i.e. = without requiring mobility management functions support in the network. = Some examples are the use of facility offered by transport (M-TCP, SCTP) = or application (SIP, HTTP Streaming) layer protocols in switching IP = addresses used for end-to-end communications. In network schemes, new distributed mobility management approaches = consider the distribution of anchoring functions among flat networking = entities. The main motivation is the elimination of nowadays single = point of failures and user traffic bottlenecks. Thus, mobility related = working groups in the IETF are now exploring requirements and solutions = supporting DMM (Distributed Mobility Management). These new approaches = promise the delivery of a better quality of service together with more = open networks, well suited to the provision of heterogeneous access and = offload solutions. They are also well suited for the integration with = both content networking and cloud networking functions at the network = edge. However, they may introduce new issues like security or location = concerns among others whereas there consideration in the evolution of = cellular networks architectures like the EPC one is not yet foreseen in = the 3GPP. The goal of this workshop is to provide and further analyse a = comprehensive vision in the design and issues for mobility management = schemes in flat networks. WORKSHOP THEME -------------- Original papers describing both theoretical and experimental results = within the scope of Flat Networks Mobility Management are solicited. = Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: =20 * Mobility management in flat networks * Distributed and dynamic mobility support * Paging and idle mode management in distributed and dynamic = mobility schemes * Fully vs partially distributed mobility architectures * Scalability issues in current hierarchical/centralised mobility = schemes * End-host vs Network mobility management * Distributed Mobility Management in LTE/EPC networks * Mobility management at transport or application layers * Data mobile usages analysis and forecast * Security and traceability concerns introduced by distributed = mobility schemes * Identification and location management in distributed mobility = approaches * Content networking in distributed mobile networks * Cloud networking in distributed mobile networks * Resource management in heterogeneous distributed mobility schemes * Flat and heterogeneous networks topologies * Energy efficiency of distributed mobility schemes =20 PAPER SUBMISSION ---------------- Authors are invited to submit original papers in English (maximum 5 = pages) electronically in PDF format through the EDAS system.=20 For all submissions, please use the templates available on the WPMC 2011 = website (www.wpmc2011.org). IMPORTANT DATES --------------- Submission deadline: 15 May 2011 Notification of acceptance: 1 July 2011 Camera ready submission: 31 August 2011 Tentative date of the Workshop: 6 October 2011 WORKSHOP ORGANISER ------------------ Philippe Bertin, Orange Labs, France TECHNICAL PROGRAM COMMITTEE --------------------------- Ramon Aguero, University of Cantabria, Spain Laszlo Bokor, BME, Hungary = Jean-Marie Bonnin, Telecom Bretagne, France Anthony Chan, Huawei, US = Johanna Heinonen, Nokia Siemens Networks, Finland Philippe Herbelin, = Orange Labs, France Dapeng Liu, China Mobile, China Telemaco Melia, = Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs, France Mai-Trang Nguyen, LIP6, France Kostas = Pentikousis, Huawei Technologies, Germany Simone Ruffino, Telecom = Italia, Italia Peter Schoo, Fraunhofer Institute, Germany Pierrick = Seit=E9, Orange Labs, France Hidetoshi Yokota, KDDI lab, Korea From rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com Thu May 5 18:20:26 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01AFDE06A8 for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 18:20:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ht2Bk3+QRM9U for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 18:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na3sys009aog107.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog107.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.197]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C9BE4E0688 for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 18:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob107.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTcNM1+39wg3bAhYxP4IAHtSg6S+3AuCg@postini.com; Thu, 05 May 2011 18:20:24 PDT Received: by mail-pz0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 9so1218349pzk.19 for ; Thu, 05 May 2011 18:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.63.10 with SMTP id q10mr1652193wfk.291.1304644821320; Thu, 05 May 2011 18:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.102] (c-24-130-227-10.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.227.10]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f5sm1417721pbt.92.2011.05.05.18.20.19 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 05 May 2011 18:20:20 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: Romain KUNTZ Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 18:20:18 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <76F62B10-5314-4481-AD25-9FC846529DCC@us.toyota-itc.com> References: <20110506011537.11517.31493.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: mext@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: Ryuji WAKIKAWA , Divya Sudhakar , Lixia Zhang Subject: [MEXT] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 01:20:26 -0000 Dear all, We have submitted a summary draft of the DMM activities in MEXT. I hope = you will find it useful and that it will trigger some more discussions = on that topic. The draft is available here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00 Thank you,=20 Romain Kuntz Begin forwarded message: > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Date: May 5, 2011 18:15:37 PDT > To: rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com > Cc: lixia@cs.ucla.edu, ryuji@us.toyota-itc.com, = rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com, divyasudhakar@ucla.edu > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt >=20 > A new version of I-D, draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt has been = successfully submitted by Romain Kuntz and posted to the IETF = repository. >=20 > Filename: draft-kuntz-dmm-summary > Revision: 00 > Title: A Summary of Distributed Mobility Management > Creation date: 2011-05-05 > WG ID: Individual Submission > Number of pages: 20 >=20 > Abstract: > As stated in the MEXT charter, the working group will "work on > operational considerations on setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so = that > traffic is distributed in an optimal way". This topic, referred to > as Distributed Mobility Management (DMM), has motivated the > submission of multiple problem statement and solution drafts. This > document aims at summarizing the current status of the DMM effort, = in > order to initiate more discussions within the working group. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > The IETF Secretariat From philippe.bertin@orange-ftgroup.com Tue May 10 02:13:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74431E07D1 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 02:13:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ewhxeEQjcmgg for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 02:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48367E06EE for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 02:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 35A618B800F; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:14:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE308B800B; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:14:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 10 May 2011 11:13:27 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:13:25 +0200 Message-ID: <8E09C72DBC577D489F13A71228C0B7BF0258CF9A@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> In-Reply-To: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201ADE435@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [MEXT] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt Thread-Index: AcwLi+EdN/RJwfyfR++mXiC1KOM+vAC0lOeQACLsqZA= References: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201ADE435@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2011 09:13:27.0539 (UTC) FILETIME=[85BAD430:01CC0EF2] Cc: philippe.bertin@orange-ftgroup.com, mext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MEXT] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 09:13:31 -0000 Dear Romain, Thank you for this draft which synthesizes well the different = requirements/proposals for DMM and help to further analyze/compare them. Please find below some comments we shared with Pierrick when reviewing = the draft, most of them being related to DMA. 1) section 2.1 Issues of centralized mobility solutions: it may be also = stated that a huge percentage of MN communications are made in a = fixed/nomadic situation and that existing mobility solutions = systematically rely on HA/tunnels mgt, whithout considering if the MN is = really moving or not (except when it is on its Home link, which in fact = is very rarely happening). This statement is further described in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chan-distributed-mobility-ps-00, = section "4.4. Need versus no need for mobility support".=20 2) the following sentence sounds like if DMA would have combined FAMA = and DMI, whereas it was designed prior to FAMA: "In Dynamic Mobility = Anchoring (DMA) proposed in [I-D.seite-netext-dma], the best ideas of = FAMA and DMI are combined" 3) current DMA does not address the reachability issue but, as Pierrick = indicated in a previous discussion on the ML, DMA allows the MN to = manage multiple addresses (or prefixes) simultaneously, which can be = anchored in different MAR; thus nothing prevent DMA to maintain one = address (or prefix) in a given MAR dedicated to anchor incoming = communications, like it would be done in a centralized HA maintaining = global Home addresses. E.g., DNS resolution will provide this "global = home address" whereas MN initiated communication flows will be anchored = on different prefixes/addresses. We should update the draft with such a = feature. Additionally, other solutions to answer reachability issue are given in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yokota-dmm-scenario: 1) use Distributed = Hash Table (DHT) to select the correct HA or 2) multiple delivery to the = Has. Their application to DMA may be analysed. 4) As you pointed out, current draft-seite-netext-dma reuse PMIP. = However, DMA is meant to describe the principle of dynamic and = distributed mobility anchoring, and, as such, is not tied to the = mobility protocol (providing that it is an anchor based mobility = protocol). Actually, the same principle of dynamic and distributed = mobility can leverage on MIP. We give clues for such a deployment in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-distributed-mobility (section 6.1). = 5) In the conclusion it is not clear what you mean by "partial" dynamic = mobility support. The basic idea of DMA, is to provide a fully dynamic = mechanism in order to forward/tunnel only flows requiring such a = mobility support in the network.=20 I am convinced that the dynamic property is more important than the = distributed one.=20 6) The conclusion states that "it is still unclear how applications = could select the desired source address for their sessions". For this = issue we consider the use of IPv6 address states by automatically adapt = their relative lifetime: when in the "Active/Preferred state", the = address can be used for any new flow/transport connection; when in the = "Active/Deprecated" state, the address shall be used only to maintain = existing communication sessions. Then, prefix/addresses allocated in = previous MAR shall be kept "active/deprecated" in order to avoid their = use for new communications/flows. Hope this helps ;-) Philippe and Pierrick > -----Message d'origine----- > De=A0: mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] De la part = de > Romain KUNTZ > Envoy=E9=A0: vendredi 6 mai 2011 03:20 > =C0=A0: mext@ietf.org > Cc=A0: Ryuji WAKIKAWA; Divya Sudhakar; Lixia Zhang > Objet=A0: [MEXT] Fwd: New Version Notification = fordraft-kuntz-dmm-summary- > 00.txt >=20 > Dear all, >=20 > We have submitted a summary draft of the DMM activities in MEXT. I = hope > you will find it useful and that it will trigger some more discussions = on > that topic. The draft is available here: >=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00 >=20 > Thank you, > Romain Kuntz >=20 >=20 > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Date: May 5, 2011 18:15:37 PDT > > To: rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com > > Cc: lixia@cs.ucla.edu, ryuji@us.toyota-itc.com, = rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com, > divyasudhakar@ucla.edu > > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt has been > successfully submitted by Romain Kuntz and posted to the IETF = repository. > > > > Filename: draft-kuntz-dmm-summary > > Revision: 00 > > Title: A Summary of Distributed Mobility Management > > Creation date: 2011-05-05 > > WG ID: Individual Submission > > Number of pages: 20 > > > > Abstract: > > As stated in the MEXT charter, the working group will "work on > > operational considerations on setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so = that > > traffic is distributed in an optimal way". This topic, referred = to > > as Distributed Mobility Management (DMM), has motivated the > > submission of multiple problem statement and solution drafts. = This > > document aims at summarizing the current status of the DMM effort, = in > > order to initiate more discussions within the working group. > > > > > > > > > > The IETF Secretariat >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > MEXT mailing list > MEXT@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue May 10 10:39:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D53E08E7; Tue, 10 May 2011 10:39:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.577 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.577 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.022, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05vaKa73-vcC; Tue, 10 May 2011 10:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53D0DE08D1; Tue, 10 May 2011 10:39:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.54 Message-ID: <20110510173914.9223.13342.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 10:39:14 -0700 Cc: mext@ietf.org Subject: [MEXT] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:39:15 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 Working = Group of the IETF. Title : Home Agent Reliability Protocol (HARP) Author(s) : Ryuji Wakikawa Filename : draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt Pages : 44 Date : 2011-05-10 The home agent can be a single point of failure when Mobile IPv6 and its associated supporting protocols are operated in a system. It is critical to provide home agent reliability in the event of a home agent crashing or becoming unavailable. This would allow another home agent to take over and continue providing service to the mobile nodes. This document describes the problem scope briefly, and provides mechanisms of home agent failure detection, home agent state transfer, and home agent switching for home agent redundancy and reliability. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt From ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com Tue May 10 13:28:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE86E07FF for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TEfPrU8blEPS for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB62E06C3 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so4029138pzk.31 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :subject:date:references:to:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer; bh=ErycmO0j1/3EbqBOxdnjpw5tvVWZJI0NSsyMZyN0z0s=; b=pvOOqQ4zSSJMbYp045mL8zmLlxpj67QhJ4cZ+7rfGHML0sgKNdDLd01f8np3Gz2rgf +ROUUkRlwkIwbsMugoM4zYIg0AUE5rgdXgtIjLbTt0eyKaRfKHt97cZsnlYGqYZOpv3Q XbYhYwaNpKsyJQp/qu4CCgWYR+tdufXeKL5FY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:references :to:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer; b=OmBSggXQ1JZNPBdn3iYs1LhrC+I02iB2iPKjyplnIMgxaIk1ll24dZ/B1l02VoENzW p2lszB5kdFbrWPpN21l9u6QeNWHV1ouFThomZtZIKX+JgX/vNY4XeJblPGwWJfvcCUbG RNpP5YqAncE6hwuOynOrmuFbJJx24dyD+FrBk= Received: by 10.68.17.10 with SMTP id k10mr11710913pbd.357.1305059296698; Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.110.116] ([206.132.173.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c14sm5017939pbu.84.2011.05.10.13.28.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Ryuji Wakikawa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 13:28:13 -0700 References: <20110510173914.9223.13342.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "mext@ietf.org MEXT WG ML" Message-Id: <7BA59DEC-F82A-45E7-AD73-4093E33ECF6A@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: [MEXT] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 20:28:18 -0000 Hi all This submission is just to keep the ID active.=20 We didn't modify the document.=20 ryuji Begin forwarded message: > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Date: 2011/05/10 10:39:14GMT-07:00 > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: mext@ietf.org > Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobility EXTensions for = IPv6 Working Group of the IETF. >=20 > Title : Home Agent Reliability Protocol (HARP) > Author(s) : Ryuji Wakikawa > Filename : draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > Pages : 44 > Date : 2011-05-10 >=20 > The home agent can be a single point of failure when Mobile IPv6 and > its associated supporting protocols are operated in a system. It is > critical to provide home agent reliability in the event of a home > agent crashing or becoming unavailable. This would allow another > home agent to take over and continue providing service to the mobile > nodes. This document describes the problem scope briefly, and > provides mechanisms of home agent failure detection, home agent = state > transfer, and home agent switching for home agent redundancy and > reliability. >=20 >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: > = ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Wed May 11 05:59:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A7DE07EB for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 05:59:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.165 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.165 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3rusIRIGbDvX for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 05:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FBD7E078B for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 05:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.2) with ESMTP id p4BCxDMq016157 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 May 2011 14:59:13 +0200 Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4BCxDpx002696; Wed, 11 May 2011 14:59:13 +0200 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com) Received: from [132.166.133.178] (is010173.intra.cea.fr [132.166.133.178]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.1) with ESMTP id p4BCxCqK029769; Wed, 11 May 2011 14:59:13 +0200 Message-ID: <4DCA8821.9070301@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 14:59:13 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mext Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [MEXT] Discussions and drafts about vehicular communications X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:59:16 -0000 Dear MEXTers, For your information, in Prague and on, these discussions happened about vehicular communications and Internet: - emails public on the MEXT mailing list, and private, about interest in vehicular communications, caused by V2V agenda request, March 2011. - discussion on the 6MAN list about Vehicle's VIN in IPv6, March 2011. - informal chat at the Prague Social (Carlos, Giorgios, myself) about pursuing vehicular communications activities at IETF, March 2011. - informal chat Ryuji and myself about particular companies (non)interest in vehicular communications at IETF, March 2011. Drafts with focus on vehicular communications : draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02, Jan. 2009. draft-karagiannis-traffic-safety-requirements-02.txt, Feb. 2010. draft-wakikawa-roll-invehicle-reqs-00.txt, May 2008. draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01.txt, Feb. 2011. Any other draft with focus on vehicular communications? Thanks, Alex From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Wed May 11 09:14:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169C9E07C2 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:14:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id utOkbV5nNjXy for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail33.telekom.de (tcmail33.telekom.de [194.25.30.7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E43ACE0679 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he111631.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.23]) by tcmail31.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 11 May 2011 18:14:01 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([169.254.4.105]) by HE111631.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Wed, 11 May 2011 18:14:01 +0200 From: To: Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 18:13:58 +0200 Thread-Topic: [MEXT] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt Thread-Index: AcwPUOCyhF+G67ReQsuSggjN/OFm7QAoLp0A Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A25732565F9@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <20110510173914.9223.13342.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7BA59DEC-F82A-45E7-AD73-4093E33ECF6A@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7BA59DEC-F82A-45E7-AD73-4093E33ECF6A@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: mext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MEXT] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 16:14:15 -0000 Dear Ryuji, Thanks for that ;-) - since the HARP draft is also referenced in Romains DM= M draft I took a closer look at it detecting some - mostly very minor - typ= os resp. nits ... Which may be considered for the next 'real' modification= : Page 4: can accomodate =3D> can accommodate Page 8: detect active =3D> detect actively [RFC- 3775, =3D> [RFC-3775, Page 9: HSRP [RFC- 2281] =3D> HSRP [RFC-2281] Page 10: For example, =3D> This applies to, for example, Page 11, Figure 3 |------->| | | 4. HA2 sends SW-COMP =3D> |<-------| | |= 4. HA2 sends SW-COMP (optional) At least in the text below step 4 is described as optional - whereas step 7= is marked optional in the Figure, but not the text ... A question here would be whether there is no HA-HELLO exchange within the H= A set required after switch-over/switch-back of the active HA? Page 16: rollover occurrs =3D> rollover occurs Page 17: HA- HELLO with =3D> HA-HELLO with Page 20: (Binding Identifier Option [RFC-5648] =3D> (Binding Identifier Option [RFC-= 5648]) Page 24: If there are a =3D> If there is a Page 25: using The IKEv2 =3D> using the IKEv2 standby home Agent =3D> standby home agent vendor- specific =3D> vendor-specific Page 26: o Count IPv6 IPv6 Addr =3D> ? (is this meant to state that IPv4 is not app= liable here, since in RFC-5798 it is defined as 'Count IPvX Addr') o Max Advert Int =3D> o Max Adver Int (as defined in RFC-5798) Page 27: same as one in [RFC-3775] =3D> same one as in [RFC-3775] (?) Page 31: 4: Home Agent HELLO =3D> 5: Home Agent HELLO Page 40: [RFC5723] =3D> [RFC-5723] (just to be consistent throughout the document) Just my 2 cents ;-) Best regards Dirk -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- Von: mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Ry= uji Wakikawa Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Mai 2011 22:28 An: mext@ietf.org MEXT WG ML Betreff: [MEXT] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt Hi all This submission is just to keep the ID active. We didn't modify the document. ryuji Begin forwarded message: > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Date: 2011/05/10 10:39:14GMT-07:00 > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: mext@ietf.org > Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direct= ories. This draft is a work item of the Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 Workin= g Group of the IETF. > > Title : Home Agent Reliability Protocol (HARP) > Author(s) : Ryuji Wakikawa > Filename : draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > Pages : 44 > Date : 2011-05-10 > > The home agent can be a single point of failure when Mobile IPv6 and > its associated supporting protocols are operated in a system. It is > critical to provide home agent reliability in the event of a home > agent crashing or becoming unavailable. This would allow another > home agent to take over and continue providing service to the mobile > nodes. This document describes the problem scope briefly, and > provides mechanisms of home agent failure detection, home agent state > transfer, and home agent switching for home agent redundancy and > reliability. > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.txt > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list MEXT@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext From philippe.bertin@orange-ftgroup.com Mon May 16 05:35:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46693E06B8 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 05:35:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.39 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.39 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZRenQWQ3WMDp for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 05:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2A0E0713 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 05:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D5248B8007 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 14:35:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DCB8B8001 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 14:35:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.56]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 16 May 2011 14:35:09 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 14:35:07 +0200 Message-ID: <8E09C72DBC577D489F13A71228C0B7BF025D04BE@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: MMFN 2011 (WPMC) DEADLINE EXTENSION (24 May) Thread-Index: AcwKO7IQf6E9FvMoQu2xNolDtk5s2wI+gPwAAAAxoQAAI7nvcA== From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 May 2011 12:35:09.0126 (UTC) FILETIME=[B150F660:01CC13C5] Subject: [MEXT] MMFN 2011 (WPMC) DEADLINE EXTENSION (24 May) X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 12:35:12 -0000 Dear all,=20 We decided to extend the MMFN workshop deadline until the 24th of May This workshop is highly relevant for ongoing work around DMM,=20 Best regards Philippe [We apologize if you receive multiple copies of this message] -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------- Call for papers MMFN 2011 International Workshop on Mobility Management for Flat Networks 6 October 2011 (date to be confirmed) In conjunction with the 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communication - WPMC 2011 www.wpmc2011.org 3-6 October, 2011 Brest, France Technically co-sponsored by IEEE ComSoc, IEEE Section France and SEE CFP available on = http://www.wpmc2011.org/Call_for_papers_MMFN_2011-591-0-0-0.html GOALS FOR THE WORKSHOP ---------------------- Cellular networks architectures rely on hierarchical and centralised = mobility anchoring functions tracking mobile nodes location and = movements while supporting mobile traffic management and indirections. = It is now recognized that such approaches lead to scalability issues = like the creation of networks bottlenecks in central mobility anchoring = functions as well as efficiency issues in cascading several per-user = traffic encapsulation/de-capsulation functions. Hence, with the = exponential growth in mobile data services usage, scalability and = quality of service issues are foreseen even if most of users are not on = the move while communicating. Considering the current trend in flattening networks architectures, new = means of supporting mobility can be envisaged in a more distributed and = dynamic fashion. Such considerations include end-hosts and network = schemes. In end-hosts schemes, mobility is provided at end-hosts level only, i.e. = without requiring mobility management functions support in the network. = Some examples are the use of facility offered by transport (M-TCP, SCTP) = or application (SIP, HTTP Streaming) layer protocols in switching IP = addresses used for end-to-end communications. In network schemes, new distributed mobility management approaches = consider the distribution of anchoring functions among flat networking = entities. The main motivation is the elimination of nowadays single = point of failures and user traffic bottlenecks. Thus, mobility related = working groups in the IETF are now exploring requirements and solutions = supporting DMM (Distributed Mobility Management). These new approaches = promise the delivery of a better quality of service together with more = open networks, well suited to the provision of heterogeneous access and = offload solutions. They are also well suited for the integration with = both content networking and cloud networking functions at the network = edge. However, they may introduce new issues like security or location = concerns among others whereas there consideration in the evolution of = cellular networks architectures like the EPC one is not yet foreseen in = the 3GPP. The goal of this workshop is to provide and further analyse a = comprehensive vision in the design and issues for mobility management = schemes in flat networks. WORKSHOP THEME -------------- Original papers describing both theoretical and experimental results = within the scope of Flat Networks Mobility Management are solicited. = Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: =20 * Mobility management in flat networks * Distributed and dynamic mobility support * Paging and idle mode management in distributed and dynamic = mobility schemes * Fully vs partially distributed mobility architectures * Scalability issues in current hierarchical/centralised mobility = schemes * End-host vs Network mobility management * Distributed Mobility Management in LTE/EPC networks * Mobility management at transport or application layers * Data mobile usages analysis and forecast * Security and traceability concerns introduced by distributed = mobility schemes * Identification and location management in distributed mobility = approaches * Content networking in distributed mobile networks * Cloud networking in distributed mobile networks * Resource management in heterogeneous distributed mobility schemes * Flat and heterogeneous networks topologies * Energy efficiency of distributed mobility schemes =20 PAPER SUBMISSION ---------------- Authors are invited to submit original papers in English (maximum 5 = pages) electronically in PDF format through the EDAS system.=20 For all submissions, please use the templates available on the WPMC 2011 = website (www.wpmc2011.org). IMPORTANT DATES --------------- Submission deadline: 24 May 2011 Notification of acceptance: 15 July 2011 Camera ready submission: 12 September 2011 Tentative date of the Workshop: 6 October 2011=20 WORKSHOP ORGANISER ------------------ Philippe Bertin, Orange Labs, France TECHNICAL PROGRAM COMMITTEE --------------------------- Ramon Aguero, University of Cantabria, Spain Laszlo Bokor, BME, Hungary = Jean-Marie Bonnin, Telecom Bretagne, France Anthony Chan, Huawei, US = Johanna Heinonen, Nokia Siemens Networks, Finland Philippe Herbelin, = Orange Labs, France Dapeng Liu, China Mobile, China Telemaco Melia, = Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs, France Mai-Trang Nguyen, LIP6, France Kostas = Pentikousis, Huawei Technologies, Germany Simone Ruffino, Telecom = Italia, Italia Peter Schoo, Fraunhofer Institute, Germany Pierrick = Seit=E9, Orange Labs, France Hidetoshi Yokota, KDDI lab, Korea From rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com Mon May 16 17:32:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1920DE06A4 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jMNk4UlKD8Cp for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na3sys009aog103.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog103.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A1012E0686 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pv0-f171.google.com ([74.125.83.171]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob103.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTdHCKoQDQ+ZbXotkY/RxKQwNliQx7jnK@postini.com; Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:44 PDT Received: by mail-pv0-f171.google.com with SMTP id 4so2720pva.16 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.30.226 with SMTP id v2mr60883pbh.186.1305592362527; Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saby-lt.paloalto.toyota-itc.com ([206.132.173.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j2sm2208pbg.60.2011.05.16.17.32.39 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:41 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Romain KUNTZ In-Reply-To: <8E09C72DBC577D489F13A71228C0B7BF0258CF9A@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 17:32:27 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <88AC887C-3529-4945-9EC8-10E2B14E5FB5@us.toyota-itc.com> References: <843DA8228A1BA74CA31FB4E111A5C46201ADE435@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> <8E09C72DBC577D489F13A71228C0B7BF0258CF9A@ftrdmel0.rd.francetelecom.fr> To: philippe.bertin@orange-ftgroup.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: mext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MEXT] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 00:32:46 -0000 Dear Philippe and Pierrick, On May 10, 2011, at 2:13, = wrote: > Thank you for this draft which synthesizes well the different = requirements/proposals for DMM and help to further analyze/compare them. > Please find below some comments we shared with Pierrick when reviewing = the draft, most of them being related to DMA. Thank you for your comments. Some answers below: > 1) section 2.1 Issues of centralized mobility solutions: it may be = also stated that a huge percentage of MN communications are made in a = fixed/nomadic situation and that existing mobility solutions = systematically rely on HA/tunnels mgt, whithout considering if the MN is = really moving or not (except when it is on its Home link, which in fact = is very rarely happening). This statement is further described in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chan-distributed-mobility-ps-00, = section "4.4. Need versus no need for mobility support".=20 Whether it represents a huge percentage of the MN communications depends = on the deployment scenario & the type of application, but in any case it = is true that the systematic use of the tunnel should be pointed in that = section. We will add it for the next version.=20 > 2) the following sentence sounds like if DMA would have combined FAMA = and DMI, whereas it was designed prior to FAMA: "In Dynamic Mobility = Anchoring (DMA) proposed in [I-D.seite-netext-dma], the best ideas of = FAMA and DMI are combined" True, sorry for the confusion. We will correct that.=20 > 3) current DMA does not address the reachability issue but, as = Pierrick indicated in a previous discussion on the ML, DMA allows the MN = to manage multiple addresses (or prefixes) simultaneously, which can be = anchored in different MAR; thus nothing prevent DMA to maintain one = address (or prefix) in a given MAR dedicated to anchor incoming = communications, like it would be done in a centralized HA maintaining = global Home addresses. E.g., DNS resolution will provide this "global = home address" whereas MN initiated communication flows will be anchored = on different prefixes/addresses. We should update the draft with such a = feature. >=20 > Additionally, other solutions to answer reachability issue are given = in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yokota-dmm-scenario: 1) use = Distributed Hash Table (DHT) to select the correct HA or 2) multiple = delivery to the Has. > Their application to DMA may be analysed. Right, we will add these potential solutions in the conclusion.=20 > 4) As you pointed out, current draft-seite-netext-dma reuse PMIP. = However, DMA is meant to describe the principle of dynamic and = distributed mobility anchoring, and, as such, is not tied to the = mobility protocol (providing that it is an anchor based mobility = protocol). Actually, the same principle of dynamic and distributed = mobility can leverage on MIP. We give clues for such a deployment in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-distributed-mobility (section 6.1).=20= Yes, actually DMI and FAMA explains how to apply this principle to = MIPv6, which is why we only focused on PMIPv6 for DMA.=20 > 5) In the conclusion it is not clear what you mean by "partial" = dynamic mobility support. The basic idea of DMA, is to provide a fully = dynamic mechanism in order to forward/tunnel only flows requiring such a = mobility support in the network.=20 > I am convinced that the dynamic property is more important than the = distributed one.=20 We have scored the dynamic mobility support as "partial" because none of = the protocols consider how applications could effectively use such = mechanism. Is it a protocol matter? Or an application API matter? Mobile IPv6 already proposes such dynamic mobility through RFC5014 by = allowing to bind a socket to the HoA or the CoA. The DMM solutions makes = the problem a little bit more complex because more than 1 HoA is used, = but they do not explain whether they should extend RFC5014, or have some = specific source address selection mechanism (such as the one you explain = below).=20 > 6) The conclusion states that "it is still unclear how applications = could select the desired source address for their sessions". For this = issue we consider the use of IPv6 address states by automatically adapt = their relative lifetime: when in the "Active/Preferred state", the = address can be used for any new flow/transport connection; when in the = "Active/Deprecated" state, the address shall be used only to maintain = existing communication sessions. Then, prefix/addresses allocated in = previous MAR shall be kept "active/deprecated" in order to avoid their = use for new communications/flows. Do you have any pointer (draft/paper) where this is explained and that = we could reference in our draft? > Hope this helps ;-) Yes, thanks again for the input! We will update the draft accordingly. romain >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] De la part = de >> Romain KUNTZ >> Envoy=E9 : vendredi 6 mai 2011 03:20 >> =C0 : mext@ietf.org >> Cc : Ryuji WAKIKAWA; Divya Sudhakar; Lixia Zhang >> Objet : [MEXT] Fwd: New Version Notification = fordraft-kuntz-dmm-summary- >> 00.txt >>=20 >> Dear all, >>=20 >> We have submitted a summary draft of the DMM activities in MEXT. I = hope >> you will find it useful and that it will trigger some more = discussions on >> that topic. The draft is available here: >>=20 >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00 >>=20 >> Thank you, >> Romain Kuntz >>=20 >>=20 >> Begin forwarded message: >>=20 >>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org >>> Date: May 5, 2011 18:15:37 PDT >>> To: rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com >>> Cc: lixia@cs.ucla.edu, ryuji@us.toyota-itc.com, = rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com, >> divyasudhakar@ucla.edu >>> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt >>>=20 >>> A new version of I-D, draft-kuntz-dmm-summary-00.txt has been >> successfully submitted by Romain Kuntz and posted to the IETF = repository. >>>=20 >>> Filename: draft-kuntz-dmm-summary >>> Revision: 00 >>> Title: A Summary of Distributed Mobility Management >>> Creation date: 2011-05-05 >>> WG ID: Individual Submission >>> Number of pages: 20 >>>=20 >>> Abstract: >>> As stated in the MEXT charter, the working group will "work on >>> operational considerations on setting up Mobile IPv6 networks so = that >>> traffic is distributed in an optimal way". This topic, referred to >>> as Distributed Mobility Management (DMM), has motivated the >>> submission of multiple problem statement and solution drafts. This >>> document aims at summarizing the current status of the DMM effort, = in >>> order to initiate more discussions within the working group. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> The IETF Secretariat >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> MEXT mailing list >> MEXT@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Tue May 17 06:15:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B61E0821 for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 06:15:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.872 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.872 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.377, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dX6YhOOZ+xnc for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 06:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B44E076C for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 06:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.2) with ESMTP id p4HDFGhb001258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 May 2011 15:15:16 +0200 Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4HDFGsk026400; Tue, 17 May 2011 15:15:16 +0200 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com) Received: from [132.166.133.178] (is010173.intra.cea.fr [132.166.133.178]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.1) with ESMTP id p4HDFGuE012359; Tue, 17 May 2011 15:15:16 +0200 Message-ID: <4DD274E4.1060600@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 15:15:16 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mext References: <4DCA8821.9070301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4DCA8821.9070301@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [MEXT] Discussions and drafts about vehicular communications X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 13:15:19 -0000 I added a draft to the top of this list (suggested in private): draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00.txt, October 2009. draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02, Jan. 2009. draft-karagiannis-traffic-safety-requirements-02.txt, Feb. 2010. draft-wakikawa-roll-invehicle-reqs-00.txt, May 2008. draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01.txt, Feb. 2011. draft-petrescu-mip4-tuntype-change-00.txt, March 2011. Any other draft related to vehicular communications at IETF that I miss? Any other private discussion that I may be missing? Alex Le 11/05/2011 14:59, Alexandru Petrescu a écrit : > Dear MEXTers, > > For your information, in Prague and on, these discussions happened about > vehicular communications and Internet: > > - emails public on the MEXT mailing list, and private, about > interest in vehicular communications, caused by V2V agenda request, > March 2011. > - discussion on the 6MAN list about Vehicle's VIN in IPv6, March 2011. > - informal chat at the Prague Social (Carlos, Giorgios, myself) about > pursuing vehicular communications activities at IETF, March 2011. > - informal chat Ryuji and myself about particular companies > (non)interest in vehicular communications at IETF, March 2011. > > Drafts with focus on vehicular communications : > > draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02, Jan. 2009. > draft-karagiannis-traffic-safety-requirements-02.txt, Feb. 2010. > draft-wakikawa-roll-invehicle-reqs-00.txt, May 2008. > draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01.txt, Feb. 2011. > > Any other draft with focus on vehicular communications? > > Thanks, > > Alex > From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Tue May 17 07:55:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08C72E06D9 for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 07:55:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u5drK8gjxW0J for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 07:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail53.telekom.de (tcmail53.telekom.de [217.5.214.110]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C2CE0658 for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 07:55:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he111630.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.22]) by tcmail51.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 17 May 2011 16:54:40 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([169.254.4.105]) by HE111630.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 17 May 2011 16:54:40 +0200 From: To: Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 16:54:38 +0200 Thread-Topic: [MEXT] Discussions and drafts about vehicular communications Thread-Index: AcwUlKN5dvalkVjKQZK2adDypWgZoAACk4UA Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A257349CBDD@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <4DCA8821.9070301@gmail.com> <4DD274E4.1060600@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4DD274E4.1060600@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: mext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MEXT] Discussions and drafts about vehicular communications X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:55:15 -0000 Dear Alex, Maybe the following drafts although expired are interesting in that context= : http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-uehara-dtnrg-decentralized-probe-message-00.= txt, Nov. 2010 draft-uehara-dtnrg-decentralized-probe-transport-00, Nov. 2010 draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-04.txt, March 2010 http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-singh-simple-vehicle-info, July 2007 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sijeon-mext-nemo-pmip6-00 Oct. 2010 If you count planes as vehicles there are also draft-bauer-mext-aero-solspace Sep 2009 draft-bauer-mext-aero-topology Sep 2009 draft-bernardos-mext-aero-nemo-ro-sol-analysis Nov 2008 Just my 1.5 cents ;-) Best regards Dirk Von: mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Al= exandru Petrescu Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Mai 2011 15:15 An: mext Betreff: Re: [MEXT] Discussions and drafts about vehicular communications I added a draft to the top of this list (suggested in private): draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00.txt, October 2009. draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02, Jan. 2009. draft-karagiannis-traffic-safety-requirements-02.txt, Feb. 2010. draft-wakikawa-roll-invehicle-reqs-00.txt, May 2008. draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01.txt, Feb. 2011. draft-petrescu-mip4-tuntype-change-00.txt, March 2011. Any other draft related to vehicular communications at IETF that I miss? Any other private discussion that I may be missing? Alex Le 11/05/2011 14:59, Alexandru Petrescu a =E9crit : > Dear MEXTers, > > For your information, in Prague and on, these discussions happened about > vehicular communications and Internet: > > - emails public on the MEXT mailing list, and private, about > interest in vehicular communications, caused by V2V agenda request, > March 2011. > - discussion on the 6MAN list about Vehicle's VIN in IPv6, March 2011. > - informal chat at the Prague Social (Carlos, Giorgios, myself) about > pursuing vehicular communications activities at IETF, March 2011. > - informal chat Ryuji and myself about particular companies > (non)interest in vehicular communications at IETF, March 2011. > > Drafts with focus on vehicular communications : > > draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02, Jan. 2009. > draft-karagiannis-traffic-safety-requirements-02.txt, Feb. 2010. > draft-wakikawa-roll-invehicle-reqs-00.txt, May 2008. > draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01.txt, Feb. 2011. > > Any other draft with focus on vehicular communications? > > Thanks, > > Alex > _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list MEXT@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext