# WG status update   {#wg-status-update}

## Adaption call   {#adaption-call}

### (1) Draft-kohno-dmm-srv6mob-arch draft   {#1-draft-kohno-dmm-srv6mob-arch-draft}

*   no significant issue

### (2) mup-evaluation draft   {#2-mup-evaluation-draft}

*   (Tianji) Request to post the issue in detail to DMM mailing.

# Presentation   {#presentation}

## 1. Mobility Aware Transport Network Slicing for 5G   {#1-mobility-aware-transport-network-slicing-for-5g}

*   [draft-ietf-dmm-tn-aware-mobility][1], John Kaippallimalil, 15 min.

### Question/Comment:   {#questioncomment}

*   (Chair)
    *   IETF has a lot of transport technologies. Why still this draft
        is stating ppr as the transport?
    
    *   Do you have any implementation of the udp source mapping for
        slicing? - No.
    
    *   Need to work with the transport experts.

*   (Takahiro)
    *   How about c-plane slice? - the draft text covers the slicing of
        the control plane as well.

*   (Sudesh)
    *   Is the private network covered? - The draft could be covering
        both private and public network. But having the discussion
        offline to figure out if there are any issues.

## Computing aware traffic steering use case of mobile user plane   {#computing-aware-traffic-steering-use-case-of-mobile-user-plane}

*   [draft-duongph-dmm-computing-aware-ts-mup-sr][2], Dương Phùng Hà,
    10min.

### Question/Comment:   {#questioncomment-1}

*   (John)
    *   Now looks like this is trying to combine based on the reverse
        manner.

*   (Tom)
    *   What is the requirement on the data path? Also, what is the
        impact on 5GC? What is the expectation to 5GC? — No intention to
        make any change in 5GC

*   (Tianji)
    *   CATS-MUP-C could be hacked to 5GC architecture to get the UE
        location, etc which are handled by AMF, etc.. This is requesting
        a lot of things to 5GC...

*   (Yuya)
    *   Need to clarify the anycast service pdu session in detail...

*   (Hannu)
    *   Why this draft is submitted in DMM? Because this is not related
        to “mobility”

*   (Marco)
    *   This draft can introduce the confusion to 5GC/CATS discussion.
        The path/traffic steering should be independent from particular
        mobility system.

*   (Arashmid)
    *   The draft assumes to use SRv6 but any operators should pick up
        any transport technologies like SRv6, MPLS, etc…

*   (Chair)
    *   How to advertise the route awarding CATS? - Route is advertised
        with CATS metric (Need to describe it in the draft)

*   (Tianji)
    *   Why SR? it seems that SR is outhogonal to what you propose in
        the draft.

*   (John)
    *   You don't need interwork with 3GPP if DNS resolution for that
        service gives the anycast IP address.

*   (Xia Chen)
    *   Does 5G interface have a parameter to carry the Service-ID? 5GC
        can create a pdu session per slice but this draft requires a pdu
        session per service id. Is this function supported in 5GC? ==>
        The author will discuss later…

## SRH Reduction for SRv6 End.M.GTP6.E   {#srh-reduction-for-srv6-endmgtp6e}

*   [draft-kawakami-dmm-srv6-gtp6e-reduced][3], Yuya Kawakami, 20min.

### Question/Comment:   {#questioncomment-2}

*   (Tom)
    *   Is this efficient rather than looking up SRH?  
         If removing SRH, this is same as regular IPv6. So, Need to
        clarify.

*   (Suresh)
    *   How does adressing works for longer prefix, what does protocol
        use to send address? - Interwork segment route and session
        transform route-1 of MUP-SAFI route are used to advertise the
        address and SID.



[1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-tn-aware-mobility
[2]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-duongph-dmm-computing-aware-ts-mup-sr/
[3]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kawakami-dmm-srv6-gtp6e-reduced/