Hi Ahmad, Please see inline.
On 5/11/10 10:15 PM, "Ahmad Muhanna" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sri, > One more, Please see inline. > > Regards, > Ahmad > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli >> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 6:26 PM >> To: Joel M. Halpern >> Cc: [email protected]; BINET David NCPI/NAD/TIP >> Subject: Re: [Softwires] GI-DS-lite as working group item? >> >> Hi Joel, >> >> >> On 5/11/10 3:25 PM, "Joel M. Halpern" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I am somewhat confused by this description. >>> You seem to be saying that the primary need for gi-ds-lite >> is mobile. >>> But the MIP related working groups don't seem to be asking for it. >>> And while 3GPP expressed interest in DS-Lite, from what I >> can gather >>> they have not expressed particular interest in gi-ds-lite. >>> >> >> The primary consumer for Mobile IP protocols is 3GPP. There >> are various interfaces that 3GPP architecture supports, that >> includes GTP, MIPv6 and Proxy Mobile IPv6 based protocol >> interfaces. The IPv6 migration issues for mobile >> architectures are generic across these protocols. The 3GPP >> had a study item that identified the issues for IPv6 >> migration and that is specified in 3GPP TR 23.975. The >> solution documented in GI-DS-lite are other approaches that >> were considered are also listed in that document. >> >>> Usually, we make sure there is a problem before crafting a solution. >>> Was there a problem statement that I missed? >>> >> >> Agree. 3GPP TR 23.975 is a good starting point. > [Ahmad] > It good to know that you are up to speed with 3GPP specifications:) > > I would like to mention that GI-DS Lite is listed with a bunch (I guess 8) of > other approaches in an Informative Annex in the mentioned Technical Report. > Does that constitue endorsement to GI-DS Lite approach? > Sure, all those 8 approaches were considered. See the report from the 3GPP IETF workshop. http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/workshop/2010-03-01_IPv4-to-IPv6_with-IETF/Report/IP W100060.zip And, surely you can ignore that recommendation and we are only asking for consensus in this group, and not base it on that recommendation. That can only be considered as an input. Regards Sri _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
