Behcet,
Reading Multimob's current charter and the planned continuum thru possible rechartering: Future work, subject to rechartering, may study/evaluate extensions to IGMPv3/MLDv2 to support better operation in mobile environments. I would be inclined to say that anything DMM related was not planned for Multimob and DMM goes beyond the original scope of 'providing guidance for supporting multicast in a mobile environment'. I would not add any restricting text regarding multicast into DMM charter. However, I leave this to our ADs to judge whether multicast enhancement *shall not* be done within DMM after our requirement and analysis work conclude that multicast enhancements are needed. Assuming we (DMM) would conclude enhancements are needed for multicast around IETF#85, it would be a bit odd if another WG is already chartered to work in a solution space in the exactly same area. - Jouni On Dec 14, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote: > Hi Jouni, Julien, > > Should we say that multicast is out of scope? > > Multicast dmm could possibly be covered in Multimob. > > Regards, > > Behcet > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 2:54 AM, jouni korhonen <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Folks, >> >> We have been working on a charter text from DMM based on the initial goal >> setting and the input we received during the Taipei meeting. Note that this >> is the first draft and now we are soliciting for input. >> >> - Jouni & Julien >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Distributed Mobility Management (DMM) >> ------------------------------------- >> >> Charter >> >> Current Status: Active >> >> Chairs: >> Julien Laganier <[email protected]> >> Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> >> >> Internet Area Directors: >> Ralph Droms <[email protected]> >> Jari Arkko <[email protected]> >> >> Internet Area Advisor: >> Jari Arkko <[email protected]> >> >> Mailing Lists: >> General Discussion: [email protected] >> To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext >> Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext >> >> Description of Working Group: >> >> The Distributed Mobility Management (DMM) working group specifies IP >> mobility, access network and routing solutions, which allow for >> setting up IP networks so that traffic is distributed in an >> optimal way and does not rely on centrally deployed anchors to manage >> IP mobility sessions. The distributed mobility management solutions >> aim for transparency above the IP layer, including maintenance of >> active transport level sessions as mobile hosts or entire mobile >> networks change their point of attachment to the Internet. >> >> The protocol solutions should be enhancements to existing IP mobility >> protocols, either host- or network-based, such as Mobile IPv6 >> [RFC6275, 5555], Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213, 5844] and >> NEMO [RFC3963]. Alternatively, the distributed mobility management >> solution can be transparent to any underlying IP mobility protocol. >> Although the maintenance of stable home address(es) and/or prefix(es) >> and upper level sessions is a desirable goal when mobile hosts/routers >> change their point of attachment to the Internet, it is not a strict >> requirement. Mobile hosts/routers should not assume that IP >> addressing including home address(es) and/or home network prefix(es) >> remain the same throughout the entire upper level session lifetime. >> >> The distributed mobility management solutions primarily target IPv6 >> Deployment and should not be tailored specifically to support IPv4, >> in particular in situations where private IPv4 addresses and/or NATs >> are used. At least IPv6 is assumed to be present in both the mobile >> host/router and the access networks. Independent of the distributed >> mobility management solution, backward compatibility must be >> maintained. If the network or the mobile host/router do not support >> the distributed mobility management enabling protocol, nothing should >> break. >> >> Work items related to the distributed mobility management include: >> >> o Solution Requirements: Define precisely the problem of distributed >> mobility management and identity the requirements for a distributed >> mobility management solution. >> >> o Best practices and Gap Analysis: Document best practices for the >> deployment of existing mobility protocols in a distributed mobility >> management environment and identify the limitations of each such >> approach with respect to fulfillment of the solution requirements. >> >> o If limitations are identified as part of the above deliverable, >> specify extensions to existing protocols that removes these >> limitations within a distributed mobility management environment. >> >> Goals and Milestones: >> >> Aug 2012 - Submit I-D 'Solution Requirements' as a working >> group document. To be Informational RFC. >> Aug 2012 - Submit I-D 'Best practices and Gap Analysis' as a working >> group document. To be Informational RFC. >> Nov 2012 - Evaluate the need for additional working group document(s) >> for extensions to fill the identified gaps. >> Jan 2013 - Submit I-D 'Solution Requirements' to the IESG for >> consideration as an Informational RFC. >> Jan 2013 - Submit I-D 'Best practices and Gap Analysis' to the IESG for >> consideration as an Informational RFC. >> Mar 2013 - Conclude the working group or re-charter. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MEXT mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
