* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Dmm Status Pages

Distributed Mobility Management (Active WG)
Int Area: Suresh Krishnan, Terry Manderson | 2012-Jan-10 —  

IETF-99 dmm minutes

Session 2017-07-19 0930-1200: Berlin/Brussels - Audio stream - dmm chatroom


minutes-99-dmm-00 minute

          Minutes captured by  "Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]"
          ** DMM Working Group Agenda **
          Date:  Wed, July 19th, 2017
          Time:  9:30 AM to 12:00 PM, CEST
          Location:   IETF99 - Prague, Czech Republic
          Meeting Chairs: Dapeng Liu (Alibaba) & Sri Gundavelli (Cisco)
          9:30  AM:
          Title: Administrivia & Intro, WG organization & milestones
          Time: 15 minutes
          Description: Agenda, Note-taker negotiation and WG Progress Update
          Presenters: Chairs
          9:45 AM:
          Title: Protocol for Forwarding Policy Configuration (FPC) in DMM
          Time: 25 minutes
          Presenter: Lyle Bertz
          Description:  Document Status and Changes
          Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-07
          - have been working weekly since Chicago
          - focus on topology and policy
          - implementation from Verizon (demo'd at MWC)
          - ONOS and OpenDayLight.
          - this is an information model (abstract)
          - enhanced type model - DPN type
          - topology is only for DPN selection
          Suresh (AD): how soon before deadline?
          Lyle: Aiming for end of Sept.
          Sri: when are reviewers assigned?
          Suresh: when you tell me its ready from YANG perspective. These specs are
          obscure for those outside the area. Let's avoid last-minute surprise.
          Lyle: understaood.
          Dapeng: volunteers within this WG? (no one volunteered)
          Suresh: without review, this document doesn't leave WG. Wants to see
          non-author read.
          Lyle: invite anyone to pop into the weekly calls.
          SSuresh: we need people within the group to review. Wants to see more
          discussion on list.
          Lyle: we have write-up internally, will see if impact on mobility.
          Determines how much before
          10:10 AM:
          Title: MN Identifier Types for RFC 4283 MN Id Option
          Time: 15 minutes
          Presenter: Charlie Perkins (and Suresh Krishnan on IESG feedback)
          Description: IESG DISCUSS Status
          Draft:  https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-04.txt
          - Lots of discussion around types and issues on mailing lists wrt the
          - Security issue
              - Believe we have possible resolutions for issues that were raised
              - Presented many parts of the mailing list discussion in the
              - RFID Types explained further
              - Noted adding more types for LPWAN
          - Reviewed commentary from mailing list
              - Privacy concerns
                  - MNIDs by their nature are privacy issues
                  - recommend encrypting all MNIDs
              - Why so many MNIDs?
                  - people ask for them
                  - this proposal is a registry
                  - MUST encrypt (proper security measures) can help with the
              - Low energy on mailing list on what is needed
                  -  push registry to drive the expert review
                  - ensure IANA considerations in the registry are strong
                  - confirmed - only really for newer MNID types
                  - plan is to change IANA policy, get approval, designate the
          experts and move on
          - Next steps
              - straw proposal
              - keep id types and make further considerations and re-submit for
          last call
          - No hard delivery date for the next steps
          10:25 AM:
          Title: Distributed Mobility Anchoring
          Time:  15 minutes
          Presenter: H Anthony Chan
          Description: Update on the changes related to last call comments
          - 4 reviews resulting in 3 version updates; 1 review pending
          - Reviewed each change
              - In 06
                  - deleted slicing from the document
                  - deleted security management
                  - Removed description of the forwarding table
          - Noted the draft does not propose a solution but describes the mobility
          anchor and parameters used in communication/signaling
          - Described in detail the many different examples by which DMA can be
          - Clarified scope of document and organized it so that you don¹t have to
          read everything
          - Chair wants to ensure that all 4 prior reviewers approve the changes in
          the latest spec version
          10:40 AM:
          Title: On Demand Mobility Management Socket Extensions
          Time: 15 minutes
          Presenter: Danny Moses
          Description: Update on changes to the draft since IETF 98
          Draft: https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-11.txt
          - reviewed l(blocking issue)
          - noted request from chairs to address socket blocking (setsockopt)
          raised in IETF 98 by Erik Kline
              - 3 alternatives proposed and put on list
              - Noted that there was no mailing list response
              - Dave Dolson made a comment (off list) but did not select one of the
          3 options nor discussed it on the mailing list
              - Selected 2nd alternative
                  - Chair asked if issue originator was satisfied by the solution?
                  - What is the guarantee of the SetSc return? session has been
          successfully allocated and assigned to the client
                  - v6 Only noted several times
                  - Requests for accepting 2nd alternative
                      - As long as the function is documented that it blocks
                      - For POSIX, a non-blocking version or call back version is
          async probably should be provided
                      - AD - Do we need another abstract function?
                      - EK - depends on OS
                  - In general, bind is hard to use cause the AF must be known
                      - More than 1 V6 address in the return? no
                      - SetSc uses return address
                      - Another approach raised - set preferences then do something
                  - Michael - the text is not clear that the APIs are abstract;
          needs to make clearer
                      - does not mind but concerned by issues raised in other IETF
          99 meetings
                      - Suresh - although we don¹t do language bindings; goal is to
          stay abstract
                      - Lyle - Suggested to change any reference of Œcode¹ to
          pseudo code to make it more apparent it is not a language binding.  This
          seems to address the concern
                  - Suresh - this work and privacy access are orthogonal; not sure
          how the flags are considered or merging (RFC 5014 and this work)
                      - Need to check between specs and make some new considerations
          - Support of future on demand types
              - add new continuity type similar to 3GPP SSC mode 3
              - time limited session continuity
              - valid and preferred lifetime
              - Suresh - already signaled in the framework
              - What is the graceful replacement use case (will ask on mailing list)
          10:55 AM:
          Title: DMM Deployment Models and Architectural Considerations
          Time: 5 minutes
          Presenter: Seil Jeon
          Description: Update on the draft status
          Draft:  https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models-01.txt
          - quick update
          - Chair suggest to authors to fined reviewers (offline) for the document
          11:00 AM:
          Title: SRv6 for Mobile User-PlaneTime: 15 minutes
          Presenter: Satoru Matsushima
          Description: Applicability of SRv6 (Segment Routing IPv6) to user-plane
          of mobile networks
          - Context; a new proposal
          - Showed current example of mobile network and tunneling solution
          - Showed SRv6 impact
          - Gave Srv6 in a nutshell review
          - Showed examples of how this solution supports
          - related to FPC yang as a possible way to implement the solution
          - Xingpeng- Does this work use the prefix types for on demand mobility?
              - Don¹t think this is binding to the MN address assignment.
          - Marco -  May add more items to the paths that are not representative of
              - How is QoS handled? It is mentioned in the draft
          - Dapeng - Why this vs. any other solution?  Gets rid of tunnels
          - Very good work item but not in the charter.  Keep progressing and will
          discuss with AD.
          - Author hopes to update
          Title:  Network-based and Client-based DMM solutions using Mobile IP
          Time: 15 minutes
          Presenter:  Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
          Description: Use of MIP protocol in DMM architecture
          Draft (s):
          - reviewed the various documents
          - noted prior demos @ IETF
          - noted open source code availablity
          - ask WG if this work should continiue and will follow this up on the
          maling list
          11:30 AM:
          Title: Anchor-less Mobility Management
          Time: 10 minutes
          Presenter:  Xinpeng(Jackie) Wei
          Draft:  https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-wei-dmm-anchorless-mm-01.txt
          - reviewed proposal
          - described MEC use case (smart relocation) and changes for DMM
          - has the author looked at LISP? Yes
          Title: Router Advertisement Prefix Option Extension for On-Demand Mobility
          Time: 10 minutes
          Presenter: Wu-chiX Feng
          Description: Extensions to ND for indicating Mobility Service Type
          Draft:  https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-feng-dmm-ra-prefixtype-00.txt
          - reviewed
          - suggested it was brought to 6man (was done)
          - no conflict with X bit but there is another proposal to burn anohter
          bit which eats 2 of the 3 R-bits
          - Suresh noted an extension mechanims for the exhaust or control through
          a registry
          - Alex - Who makes the demand?
              - Authors: We don't want to change the semantics of RS with this
          proposal. Network will provide alternatives for the 'who'?
          - If there is an argument to modify RS we could try but authors were
          - PBD option may be good for this.
          11:50 AM:
          Title: FORCES for FPC
          Time: 5 minutes
          Presenter: Jamal Salim
          Description: Proposal for using FORCES on FPC as a south bound protocol
          Draft: TBD
          - Lyle - As an author we are interested in finishing the information model
          - as an implementor interested in the protocol
          11:55 AM:      Adjourn

Generated from PyHt script /wg/dmm/minutes.pyht Latest update: 24 Oct 2012 16:51 GMT -