Minutes IETF99: dmm
minutes-99-dmm-00

Minutes captured by  "Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]" <Lyle.T.Bertz@sprint.com>


** 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
draft
- Security issue
    - Believe we have possible resolutions for issues that were raised
    - Presented many parts of the mailing list discussion in the
presentation
    - 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
Draft:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-
06
- 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
achieved
- 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
else
        - 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
Draft:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-matsushima-spring-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane
-00
- 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
Questions
- 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
roles
    - 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


11:15AM:
Title:  Network-based and Client-based DMM solutions using Mobile IP
mechanisms
Time: 15 minutes
Presenter:  Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
Description: Use of MIP protocol in DMM architecture
Draft (s):
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bernardos-dmm-cmip-07.txt
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bernardos-dmm-pmip-08.txt
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bernardos-dmm-distributed-anchoring-09.txt
- 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
Description:
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

11:40AM:
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
discouraged.
- 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