Skip to main content

WiMAX Forum / 3GPP2 Proxy Mobile IPv4
RFC 5563

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:


From: The IESG <>
To: RFC Editor <>
Cc: The IESG <>, <>,
Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: 

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'WiMAX Forum/3GPP2 Proxy 
Mobile IPv4' <draft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode-10.txt> as an Informational 

The IESG would also like the IRSG or RFC-Editor to review the comments in 
the datatracker 
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit 
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot 
and the comment log. 

The IESG contact person is Jari Arkko.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:

The process for such documents is described at

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

Ballot Text

Technical Summary
  This specification describes how to use the existing Mobile IPv4
  protocol to implement proxy mobility function, similar to Proxy
  Mobile IPv6 from the Netlmm WG.

  This work predates the creation of the Netlmm WG and the publication
  of RFC 5213; several implementations have existed for years.

  Some additional extensions are also defined (Mobile IPv4 extensions
  can be defined via Expert Review & Specification Required).
Working Group Summary
  This is an RFC Editor submission, but there has been at least
  one presentation and some reviews in the MIP4 WG.
Protocol Quality
  Jari Arkko has reviewed this specification for the IESG.

Note to RFC Editor
  The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in
  NETLMM and MIP4 WGs, but this does not prevent publishing. 

  For background, this work pre-dates the creation of the Netlmm
  WG and there are implementations. This existing work has found
  new use in Wimax Forum and 3GPP2. In the spring of 2007 we talked
  about this draft with the relevant players, including the MIP4 and
  NETLMM chairs, 3GPP2 and Wimax liaisons and key people. The AD's
  recommendation at that time was that the IETF would have trouble
  adopting this specification to the IETF track because:

  - it was unlikely that true change control would reside at the IETF, 
    given implementations
  - the IETF already has a standard technology for this purpose 
    (Netlmm and its v4 extensions)
  - the then-looming Wimax deadlines that were just few months away.

  Since then, discussions in 3GPP2 and Wimax forum and the author's 
  revisions have taken a surprising amount of time after all. In any 
  case, I think the two first reasons are still valid. I'm fine with
  this document being published in the independent submission track
  with the exception of three minor clarifications, which we hope
  to convince the authors to do.

  We also hope that the RFC Editor and the authors take note of the
  review comments in the ID tracker, for possible revision of the


  This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard.
  The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for
  any purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish
  is not based on IETF review for such things as security,
  congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed
  protocols.  The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
  its discretion.  Readers of this document should exercise caution
  in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment. See
  RFC 3932 for more information.


  Please ensure that the Expert review is performed on the
  requested allocations.

RFC Editor Note