Hi Jeffrey, Tianji, Your draft says:
This document is not an attempt to do 3GPP work in IETF. Rather, it > discusses potential integration of IETF/wireline and 3GPP/wireless > technologies - first among parties who are familiar with both areas > and friendly with IETF/wireline technologies. If the ideas in this > document are deemed reasonable, feasible and desired among these > parties, they can then be brought to 3GPP for further discussions. What I extracted from the above text is that you won't do any substantial standardization work in DMM/IETF about the contents described in your draft, since IETF is not a right venue for that. And you will go to 3GPP with your supporters. If it is correct, I'm not clear on what "WG adoption" means here. In case that this is an informational document composed by you, however no further substantial work could be expected, do we really need "WG adoption"? or do you need WG adoption to go 3GPP? If so, what is the reason behind it? Let me share an experience between 3GPP in the past. A substantial uplane protocol work had been initiated in DMM, and then 3GPP (CT WG4) started a study for user plane protocol and a liaison between DMM was initiated by 3GPP. I think that way would be a case where we inform 3GPP one of our WG documents, but that itself would not be the goal for that work. Could you elaborate if we really need adoption, and what will you do in DMM after the adoption. --satoru On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 5:35 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang= 40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > Hi, > > > > Thanks, Tianji for presenting in IETF117 and requesting adoption in the > presentation and here. > > > > As a co-author, I obviously agree with what Tianji said here and want to > see it adopted. I am sure other co-authors share the same view even though > they did not explicitly echo “agree/support as co-author” 😊 > > > > We appreciate that DMM provided a venue for us to discuss/present the > topic/updates and gather input and supporters. We believe all the issues > that were brought up have been sufficiently discussed and addressed in the > draft, and we have not seen objections to the proposal, so it is > appropriate to adopt this informational draft as a WG document. The > adoption process, and work on the document by the WG after adoption will > improve it further. > > > > Hopefully, people are coming back from their vacations and will speak up > their thoughts. > > > > Thanks. > Jeffrey > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > *From:* dmm <dmm-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Tianji Jiang > *Sent:* Monday, August 14, 2023 6:16 PM > *To:* dmm@ietf.org > *Subject:* [DMM] Adoption call for I.D.: > draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution-06 (Mobile User Plane Evolution) > > > > *[External Email. Be cautious of content]* > > > > Dear DMM Team: > > > > During the IETF-117, we have presented and discussed our IETF draft: > ‘Mobile User Plane Evolution’ (draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/ > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-dmm-mup-evolution/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!EK_rpxFyiyc83DZJzh4RPbd0YkJPuxR3_9ox2_KhDo9ABaUZGfBEa9juMF9q91PN0_pEPjdFxcZCKY8JwZvouq1rNQ$> > ). In the presentation, we explained the fundamental ideas of the I.D., > along with our objectives. As we have stated, this was the 6th iteration > of the I.D. Including this time (of IETF-117), different versions of the > drafts have been presented & discussed thru the IETF-114, -115, -116 & > -117. > > > > At the moment, we believe we have covered sufficiently various aspects of > the MUP-evolution, i.e., the potential integration of gNB & UPF with > targeting at B5G & 6G. These are comprised of both IP-domain requirements & > wireless technologies. Further, as of now, > > - The 3GPP 4G LIPA work, i.e., the Local IP Access, bodes well for our > (B5G, 6G) ‘ANUP-like’ proposal. > - The 3GPP Rel-19 planning (5G) is on-going and some potential work > (of the I.D.) could be possibly brought it to 3GPP for further study > (Rel-19); and > - The 3GPP Rel-20 (6G roadmap) targets toward the beginning of Y-2025, > which is a perfect timing for exploration and adoption of the ANUP-like > work. > > > > Given all the work that have been done so far, we have, during the > IETF-117 DMM session, initiated a possible adoption-call of the I.D., in > the ‘informational’ track. We have emphasized our I.D. just serves as input > to 3GPP and we don’t intend to do 3GPP work in the IETF community. For a > procedural question from an on-site attendee of the DMM session, the > 3GPP-to-IETF liaison manager has shared his opinion and said there is no > problem to bring the ‘normal document’ to 3GPP for discussion/reference. > > > > At the end of the session, the DMM chair suggested we bring this draft to > the email alias. So, we are here to officially initiate the adoption-call > of our I.D. > > Team, please share your opinions, comments, questions, etc. Thank you. > > > > BR, > > > > -Tianji > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
