Alexandru Petrescu | 29 Oct 16:15 2014

Maintenance of Mobile IPv6


There are a few things that I think are needed for the maintenance of 
protocol Mobile IPv6; most important appear first:

- help with automated portal authentication in WLAN.  Hopping on and
   off from a WiFi hotspot to another, even without moving physically,
   is often obstructed by web portal authentication requiring user
   to type to fill forms; this is not only inconvenient, but in some
   cases it is impossible, like with vehicular networks where the
   driver is forbidden by law to type while behind the wheel.

- bugs in an otherwise reliable Mobile IPv6 implementation of
   a particular equipment manufacturer (HA never deletes a tunnel,
   lifetime: remaining never): should the bugs be corrected or shoudl
   the spec modified to reflect what the implementation actually
   does?  Should protocol workarounds be designed to deal with this

- future of the maintenance of the linux open source Mobile IPv6
   implementation: just for my clarification - is it still ok?  Is there
   some project behind it?  Or is it dying?  Currently the email list
   seems silent, and the latest software releases date back to more than
   one year.

- elimination, or reducing the effect, of the necessity of the 'focal
   point' Home Agent: route optimization for the masses and for moving
   networks as deployed in vehicles.

- Mobile IPv6 and IPv6 NAT Traversal;
(Continue reading)

Charlie Perkins | 28 Oct 19:51 2014

Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-perkins-dmm-privacy-00.txt

Hello folks,

We have put together a draft about privacy considerations for DMM.

Privacy is a very timely subject, and I think that it should be a kept in
mind during all design phases for the DMM teams.

This is a simple and short draft to invite discussion.  No doubt there
is a lot of room for expansion of the discussion, and we will be happy
to incorporate other guidelines or references to other relevant IETF
publications that may be suggested.

I have requested a time slot at the upcoming IETF for a discussion
about privacy as it is related to DMM protocol development.

Charlie P.

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Date: From: To:
New Version Notification for draft-perkins-dmm-privacy-00.txt
Mon, 27 Oct 2014 14:59:33 -0700
Charles E. Perkins <>, Sri Gundavelli <>, Charles E. Perkins <>, Sri Gundavelli <>

A new version of I-D, draft-perkins-dmm-privacy-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Charles E. Perkins and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-perkins-dmm-privacy Revision: 00 Title: Privacy considerations for DMM Document date: 2014-10-26 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 6 URL: Status: Htmlized: Abstract: Recent events have emphasized the importance of privacy in protocol design. This document describes ways in which DMM protocol designs and DMM networks can reduce certain threats to privacy. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at The IETF Secretariat

dmm mailing list
Charlie Perkins | 28 Oct 19:45 2014

Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-01.txt

Hello folks,

The MNIDs draft has been updated.  Comments are welcome, and the
draft will be discussed at the Hawaii meeting if there is time.

Charlie P.

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Date: From: To:
New Version Notification for draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-01.txt
Mon, 27 Oct 2014 15:10:50 -0700
Charles E. Perkins <>, Charles E. Perkins <>

A new version of I-D, draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Charles E. Perkins and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids Revision: 01 Title: MN Identifier Types for RFC 4283 Mobile Node Identifier Option Document date: 2014-10-27 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 7 URL: Status: Htmlized: Diff: Abstract: Additional Identifier Types are proposed for use with the Mobile Node Identifier Option for MIPv6 (RFC 4283). Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at The IETF Secretariat

dmm mailing list
Weixinpeng | 27 Oct 08:50 2014

FW: New Version Notification for draft-wei-dmm-address-management-00.txt

Hi all, 
A draft on IP address management in DMM is submitted, I think how IP addresses should be managed in DMM
network is very essential to
source address selection on mobile side, and mobility management signaling on network side, so there
should be a consensus on IP address management issue.

Comments are welcomed! Thanks!


>-----Original Message-----
>From: internet-drafts@... [mailto:internet-drafts@...]
>Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 3:43 PM
>To: Weixinpeng; Weixinpeng
>Subject: New Version Notification for
>A new version of I-D, draft-wei-dmm-address-management-00.txt
>has been successfully submitted by Xinpeng Wei and posted to the IETF
>Name:		draft-wei-dmm-address-management
>Revision:	00
>Title:		IP Address Management in DMM
>Document date:	2014-10-27
>Group:		Individual Submission
>Pages:		7
>   This document provides an IP address management solution for DMM
>   network.
>Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>The IETF Secretariat
Dapeng Liu | 26 Oct 16:06 2014

Draft agenda for IETF91

Draft agenda for IETF91 has been uploaded. 

Since we have formed 4 working teams during the interim, we will give most of our agenda time for the working teams.

Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu
dmm mailing list
Max | 26 Oct 15:41 2014

Minutes for Interim call#2

Minutes for interim call#2 is uploaded.

Dapeng Liu

dmm mailing list
Marco Liebsch | 24 Oct 18:20 2014

[FPSM] notes from call#1

Please find below some notes from last telco about the DMM work item Forwarding Path and Signaling Management.


Best regards,




--- notes from telco 2014-10-19: ---



Check if everybody is on the same page w.r.t. objectives.

Associated charter item has been read and focus of work item (WI) has been summarized and agreed upon:


à This work item is about the specification of the C-/D-Plane reference interface and semantics without being specific to a particular protocol


Discussion about illustration  of WI scope.




Comments and conclusions from discussion:


Provide examples for a Controller: LMA-C, MAG-C, OpenFlow-C

Example for multiple-controller space: MAG-C and LMA-C, can use PMIPv6 as inter-controller protocol.


Type of controller should not matter for the generic specification in this WI.


Controller, which is responsible for a particular D-Plane function, must be unambiguous.


Multiple controllers must be synchronized (prerequisite). (marco’s note: Maybe we should look at this again, as we
may not mandate this in any case)


Agreement that roaming should be addressed. May imply inter-controller communication (Home-Foreign network controller).
However, specification of the inter-controller interface is out of scope.
Focus is the interface between controller(s) and Data Plane Node (DPN).


This work assumes that each entity, which requires mobility management, knows how to contact a controller.


? Need to differentiate DPA, DPN and other transport nodes, such as routers and switches, which terminate
the specified interface?

! So far yes


Need to provide a clear definition of terms ‘DPA’ and ‘DPN’ in the specification.


DPA owns IP address (?)

DPN just performs routing.

Discussion about IP address ‘ownership’ at DPA. No need that IP address fits into the DPA’s network.


DPA must receive traffic from a foreign network


Discussion about special role of BGP Speakers on control and data plane node, in case BGP is used as protocol base to implement
this specification. No clear ‘policy control’ and ‘policy enforcement’ roles. No concerns with this, just an observation.


? Is this work tailored to a specific solution?

! No, it’s a utility. May be used to enable any deployment where Control- and Data-Plane are separated.


Agreed procedure: Progress the specification and description of the generic protocol interface. Authors of existing and new
solution drafts should confirm that this specification supports their protocol.


Another WI telco before IETF91? Supported!

Find suitable date/time through doodle.


--- end of telco ---


dmm mailing list
Marco Liebsch | 24 Oct 16:00 2014

[FPSM] work item call#2


the clear winner for our next telco on the work item about Forwarding Path and Signaling Management
is Monday, 3rd November 2014, 16:00 CET.


Duration: 90min.


I will send an agenda around before the meeting.


If you would like to see a particular item on the agenda, please let me know.


Best regards,



dmm mailing list
Behcet Sarikaya | 23 Oct 22:03 2014

offlisted mails

 Hi all,

If you send me an email related to dmm issues and you do not wish the
mail to be cc'ed or forwarded to the list,
please MARK your mail clearly on the subject line as offlisted.
You may wish to send the mail to 20 or so other people, I don't care.

Otherwise I may inadvertently cc it to the list.

Let this be known.


Alper Yegin | 23 Oct 20:44 2014

Mobility Exposure and Selection WT call#1


We held our first meeting on Mobility Exposure and Selection WT today.
The meeting was attended by: Fred, Danny, Jouni, Xinpeng, Anthony, John K., Byoung-Jo "J", Alper.

You can see the outcome of the first call as captured in the following PPT:


Behcet Sarikaya | 23 Oct 20:40 2014

Fwd: DMM's benefits

 my apologies for forwarding this conversation to this list without
permission from Alper.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012 <at>>
Date: Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: DMM's benefits
To: Alper Yegin <alper.yegin <at>>, "dmm <at>" <dmm <at>>
Cc: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam <at>>, Sri Gundavelli
<sgundave <at>>, "karagian <at>"
<karagian <at>>, Kostas Pentikousis <k.pentikousis <at>>,
Dapeng Liu <liudapeng <at>>, Marco Liebsch
<Marco.Liebsch <at>>, Peter McCann <Peter.McCann <at>>, h
chan <h.anthony.chan <at>>, Ryuji Wakikawa
<ryuji.wakikawa <at>>, "Zuniga, Juan Carlos"
<JuanCarlos.Zuniga <at>>, Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
<cjbc <at>>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan <at>>,
"pierrick.seite <at> IMT/OLN" <pierrick.seite <at>>,
Charlie Perkins <Charlie.Perkins <at>>, Danny Moses
<danny.moses <at>>, John Kaippallimalil
<John.Kaippallimalil <at>>

 Hi all,

Two observations:
1. I don't understand why this mail was not sent to dmm list? So I added it now.
2. It was amazing to see the amount of speculation made just based on
the acronym DMM (in Alper's mail).

How do we know what DMM solution (let me clarify it a bit) will look
like so we can talk about its performance?

Isn't this what dmm WG should work on first, keeping in mind
performance benefits and other aspects?



On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Alper Yegin <alper.yegin <at>> wrote:
> Guys,
> We've been talking about cost reduction and e2e latency reduction as the benefits of DMM (compared to
current architectures).
> Can you point to any measurements, analysis, simulation, data to back that up?
> I remember Dapeng's analysis from earlier meetings. Do you have anything else handy?
> I need to compile additional evidence ...
> Alper

dmm mailing list
dmm <at>