More inline.
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 2:27 PM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DMM] Parent versus child mobility context
Hello Lyle,
More follow-up inline. We're getting c
Hello Lyle,
More follow-up inline. We're getting closer.
On 1/22/2018 11:27 AM, Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] wrote:
Hello Lyle and all,
I think I agree with most of what you say below. I'm concerned with how to
organize the information in the model. So, for that purpose, please verify
whether my
Comments inline.
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 11:54 AM
To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] ; Marco Liebsch
Cc: dmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Parent versus child mobility context
Hello Lyle and all,
I think I agree with
Hello Lyle and all,
I think I agree with most of what you say below. I'm concerned with how
to organize the information in the model. So, for that purpose, please
verify whether my following understandings are correct.
- The mobility context resides on a DPN.
- The mobility context provide
++ mailing list
I agree with you Marco.
Keeping the parent/child relation is crucial. Although we often cite
dedicated vs. default bearers (LTE) we need to also ack that we use
hierarchical concepts throughout mobility and forwarding management protocols,
e.g. meters, session and sub-session
