Subject: [mobile-ip] Status of draft-ietf-mobileip-lowlatency-handoffs-v4-03.txt

From: Phil Roberts <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 16:39:16 -0400

In going through the last call comments on regional registrations there were
some posts about the status of this draft and to what extent it had been
discussed in the working group.  

Raj and I had talked about it and I'd proposed that we not advance this
document
based on the perceived lack of interest in it in terms of real
implementation, in
fact to remove it completely from the WG's agenda.  Since some work has been
done
on it, perhaps the correct thing to do would be to keep it and publish it as
an experimental RFC.  I can't say that I'm in favor of the latter but
tentatively
agree to do so.  When the WG started the effort there was tremendous
interest in it
but that interest has dropped nearly to zilch.  If starting today it's not
clear
there is enough constituency to add it as a working group item.  Hence my
preference to drop it altogether.  Neither of us thought that taking it onto
the standards track as proposed was appropriate.

We should have kept the WG up-to-date on our thinking and appreciate hearing
feedback on this.

Phil

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 15:41:06 -0700

Phil,

In general, as Hesham has pointed out, commercial interest hasn't
typically been the decisive criterion in the past about how to dispose
of IETF specs. That may be changing, but I believe there is value in
this work despite the fact that nobody is interested in implementing it
commercially. From a research standpoint, Motorola and DoCoMo have done
a fairly extensive amount of work to implement the protocols described
in this spec, and we have performed fairly extensive measurements on the
performance of the protocols over a simulator and two radio protocols.
We have not had the opportunity to make the results of this work
available at the IETF,  because typically such studies are not the kind
of material that gets presented in IETF meetings, and the need for
detailed graphs makes writing drafts in ASCII on the material
cumbersome. Also, the working group has been fairly consumed with
discussing MIPv6 security for the last year to the exclusion of other
topics. However, we are planning on publishing the results in other
venues and we can make references to the material available if people
are interested. Perhaps, in the final version of the draft, we can embed
the references.

It is, of course, disappointing that nobody else is interested in
implementing these protocols for research purposes, but I believe that
the amount of research work done on the protocols already justifies an
Experimental classification. There is has certainly been more work done
on these protocols, both from the design standpoint and in the
implementation and measurement, than another Experimental RFC (RFC 3082)
with which I was associated.

Therefore, I believe we should advance the draft to WG last call for
Experimental.

            jak

----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Roberts" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 1:39 PM
Subject: [mobile-ip] Status of
draft-ietf-mobileip-lowlatency-handoffs-v4-03.txt