Subject: [fmc] FW: Issue #1: Identification (was RE: List description)

From: Xueli <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 08:44:43 +0000

Dear Med, 

I am afraid the last email cannot arrive in time. Try again.:)

Cheers
Li

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xueli
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 4:01 PM
> To: [email-masked]'
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: Issue #1: Identification (was RE: [fmc] List description)
> 
> Dear Med,
> 
> Thanks so much for your detailed explanation.
> I am very glad to share some opinions as follows.
> 
> Let's see what are the scenarios prior to the discussion about the detailed port
> set solution.
> 
> There are several other general scenarios, such as the mobile subscriber is
> attached to
> home WiFi or to the 3GPP femtocell  (H(e)NB) , where the mobile subscriber
> establishes
> traffic transporting via the fixed broadband network.
> In these scenarios, WiFi is converged into RG (residential gateway), additionally
> even femtocell maybe
> converged later. Here the UEs must be behind RGs for services, where RG with
> NAT.
> 
> Let's back to the solutions.
> In case of RG with NAT, it is not easy work to achieve the port set solution.
> The RG is the user device, which doesn't belong to the operators. Even more, it
> seems not possible at all to do pre-configured on RGs.
> 
> In addition, mentioned in the ps draft, the issue #2, which is the similar
> requirement essentially, also needs solutions.
> Here, the port set would not work, either.
> 
> During the FMC work, we should concentrate on possible protocol solutions in
> IETF later. What about your idea?:)
> 
> Cheers
> Li