Subject: Re: [netlmm] Consensus Call on WG Document Adoption

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 07:55:35 -0800 (PST)

I support draft-sgundave-mip6-proxymip6-02. I would like draft-singh-netlmm-protocol-01 to be considered as an extension, i.e. of PMIPv6  to HMIPv6.
No offense to the draft authors.

--behcet

----- Original Message ----
From: "Narayanan, Vidya" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2007 3:33:42 PM
Subject: [netlmm] Consensus Call on WG Document Adoption

All,
This is a consensus call to pick a WG document for PMIPv6. Please
indicate your preference in using draft-sgundave-mip6-proxymip6-02 or
draft-singh-netlmm-protocol-01 as a starting point for the WG document.
Please note that any document chosen as the WG document will have to
reflect WG consensus - so, the current version need not be considered
final by any means. If you think one or both these documents still have
any major open issues, please state those issues on the list as well. 

Please send an email stating your preference by 23th March, 2007. If you
don't have an adequate idea of the drafts, you may wait to see the
presentation of the drafts at the NETLMM meeting in Prague before you
respond to this call. 

Thanks,
The Chairs

_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm

_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm

---

From: "John.zhao" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 10:07:01 +0800

Hello all

         Those two drafts have many things can be taken into account as a
baseline.

         And about which one we will support or how we can combine them into
one version is discussed once again.

         From the protocol design perspective, I think if we should has a
framework to merge them or chose any? For example, the draft will should
include some of following:

Basic PMIP messages definition;

PMIP trigger and decision;

PMIP registration;

PMIP binding update;

PMIP binding during handover progress;

PMIP binding release etc.

Appendix the MN consideration , AR consideration and HA consideration need
to be specified in relevant part.

         Only a suggestion, I think the baseline we need maybe should start
from the framework.

John.zhao

---

From: "Vijay Raman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:16:08 -0500

I support draft-singh-netlmm-protocol-01 to be adopted as the base WG document.

Regards,
Vijay

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Narayanan, Vidya [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 3:04 AM
> To: [email-masked]

---

From: JinHyeock Choi <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:58:56 +0000 (GMT)

I prefer to use draft-sgundave-mip6-proxymip6-02 as a starting point for the WG document.

Best Regards

JinHyeock

---

From: 장희진 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:12:10 +0000 (GMT)

I support draft-sgundave-mip6-proxymip6-02 for the basic document of PMIPv6.

Regards,

Heejin

--

>Please send an email stating your preference by 23th March, 2007. If

>you don't have an adequate idea of the drafts, you may wait to see the

---

From: "Heejin Jang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:22:50 +0900

Regards,
Heejin

---

From: "Heejin Jang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:22:50 +0900

Regards,
Heejin