Subject: [nemo] New draft submitted: draft-tsukada-nemo-mr-cooperation-analysis-00.txt

From: Manabu Tsukada <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:16:17 +0900

Dear all,

We have submitted a new draft about MRs cooperation analysis.
The aim of this document is to investigate issues and requirements
for MRs cooperation to get benefits of multihoming.

Any feedback is of course welcome.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.nautilus6.org/doc/drafts/draft-tsukada-nemo-mr-cooperation-analysis-00.txt

	Title		: Analysis of Multiple Mobile Routers Cooperation
	Author(s)	: M. Tsukada, R. Kuntz and T. Ernst
	Filename	: draft-tsukada-nemo-mr-cooperation-analysis-00.txt
	Pages		: 19
	Date		: 2005-10-17
   Abstract:
   This document is an analysis of multiple Mobile Routers Cooperation
   in the context of network mobility support (NEMO) in IPv6.  Our
   objective is to identify when cooperation between MRs is needed and
   what information must be exchanged.

Best Regards,
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Keio University     Murai Laboratory
Manabu Tsukada<[email-masked]>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

---

From: Thierry Ernst <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:41:37 +0900

Dear all,

Regarding issues developped in 
Analysis of Multihoming in Network Mobility Support
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-04.txt

I will like to highlight the need for MR cooperation (the issues are
further developped in our draft
Analysis of Multiple Mobile Routers Cooperation
http://www.nautilus6.org/doc/drafts/draft-tsukada-nemo-mr-cooperation-analysis-00.txt

I don't have a personal conclusion whether we could rely on existing or
generic but to be developped mechanisms for MR cooperation OR we should
take the specificities of bi-directional tunneling into account (HoA,
CoA, etc). So, this draft has been written with the objective of
advancing the thinking on this. 

We would appreciate to receive comments on the draft, but more
importantly, as chair, I would appreciate if we could discuss the need
to address this issue, as pointed in
as issue 4.4
http://www.mobilenetworks.org/nemo/drafts/draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-04.html#sec:problem.mrsync
in draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-04.txt

Thanks,
Thierry.

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:16:17 +0900