Anthony, Sounds good! Sorry for the late reply.
Thanks! Best Regards, Ahmad -----Original Message----- From: h chan [mailto:h.anthony.c...@huawei.com] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 7:33 PM To: Ahmad Muhanna; jouni korhonen; dmm@ietf.org Subject: RE: [DMM] WG Call for adoption: draft-chan-dmm-requirements-02 Ahmad, Thanks for the comment. To expedite the changes in the future version, let me try to plan for such changes now. I agree with you that "repositioning mobility anchors" belongs to the solution space and does not fall into the scope of the requirements document. If the following is okay, I will make this change in the future version: The key idea is that dynamic mobility management relaxes some constraints so that it may avoid the establishment of non optimal tunnels between two topologically distant anchors. H Anthony Chan -----Original Message----- From: Ahmad Muhanna [mailto:amuha...@awardsolutions.com] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 5:29 PM To: jouni korhonen; dmm@ietf.org Cc: h chan Subject: RE: [DMM] WG Call for adoption: draft-chan-dmm-requirements-02 Hello Jouni, Anthony and All, I have read the draft and I support adopting it as a WG document. However, I have the following comment. It is not necessary to address the comment now but I believe it needs to be addressed at one point. The draft under section 1. "Introduction" says: " The key idea is that dynamic mobility management relaxes some constraints while also repositioning mobility anchors; it avoids the establishment of non optimal tunnels between two topologically distant anchors. " My question: Is NOT true that the above key idea can be achieved by the proper choice of deployment and policy? If the answer is yes: Then, I assume that we are not expecting any new protocol but some recommendations on to how to achieve the above. Thanks for all the good work and effort! Best Regards, Ahmad -----Original Message----- From: dmm-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of jouni korhonen Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:56 PM To: dmm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [DMM] WG Call for adoption: draft-chan-dmm-requirements-02 <as a WG contributor> I favor adopting this document. - Jouni On Jun 20, 2012, at 11:52 AM, jouni korhonen wrote: > Folks, > > We have a good start with the requirements document in > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chan-dmm-requirements-02 > and the chairs think it is time to catch up with the charter regarding > the Solution Requirements. We are a bit ahead purposely so that we > have one official document to work on and discuss before the face to > face meeting in Vancouver. > > This email starts a 2-week consensus call on adopting > > Title : Requirements of distributed mobility management > Author(s) : H Anthony Chan > Filename : draft-chan-dmm-requirements-02.txt > Pages : 16 > Date : 2012-06-14 > > as a DMM WG document. Please, read the current revision and state you > opinion either for or against adoption (and with reasoning why) in the > mailing list. The call for adoption ends 4th July 2012. > > - Jouni & Julien _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
