Hello Thomas, 2012/8/7, Thomas C. Schmidt <[email protected]>: > Hi Dapeng Liu, > > On 06.08.2012 00:28, liu dapeng wrote: > >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 >> >> >> >> >> This draft is - if you want so - a competitor to >> draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast, but has never been >> worked out (as have several other attempts in the past). If this >> document was to be advanced, it had to rewrite (or copy ??) 80 % of >> our draft, which is not a proper way to treat authorship. >> >> ===> >> I aggree draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 is a competitor of >> draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast. Further more, >> draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover was written in June 2009 and after >> this draft was submitted for more than half a year, other similar >> draft was submitted and have a lot common idea of our draft. So I >> really do not see why someone say if this document was to be advanced, >> it will need to "COPY" 80% of >> draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast? >> >> To Behcet: >> >> 1. First of all, may I ask why IETF need more than one solution for >> one problem? >> 2. If the group have decided to allow more than one WG draft forthis >> problem, I then also request the group to consider >> draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 as one basis of WG document. >> > > Two answers: > > 1. There may be several solutions for different scenarios on the same > problem scope, as the unicast-people worked out several solutions (i.e., > MIPSHOP worked out the (P)FMIPv6 handover solution and the transient > binding in parallel.
===> Then may I ask what is the different scenarios in the PMIPv6 multicast fast handover case? > 2. draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover-04 has never been worked out. In > fact, it merely repeats incomplete work that has been around for years, > the first draft with incomplete sketches on fast handover has been > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-suh-mipshop-fmcast-mip6-00 in 2004! ==> draft-suh-mipshop-fmcast-mip6-00 is the solution for Mobile IPv6 and draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover is the solution for PMIP. That is different scenario. The author of draft-hui-multimob-fast-handover even did not noticed that there was a mipshop draft at that time so I do not see why using the word "repeat". But I do notice that draft-schmidt-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast has a lot similarity with draft-suh-mipshop-fmcast-mip6-00. regards, Dapeng > So the argument we were presenting is: there is reason and need for this > fast handover solution, and we should adopt the document that is most > mature, completely worked out and discussed many times in the WG. > > Cheers, > > Thomas > -- > > Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt > ° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Berliner Tor 7 ° > ° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group 20099 Hamburg, Germany ° > ° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 ° > ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 ° > -- ------ Best Regards, Dapeng Liu _______________________________________________ multimob mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
