[STDS-802-16] FW:: Recharter of Mobility for IPv4 (mip4)
FYI.
Roger
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:01:23 -0700
>From: "Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@HP.COM>
>Subject: [802SEC] FW: [New-work] WG Review: Recharter of Mobility
>for IPv4 (mip4)
>
>WG Chairs,
>
>The following announcement from the IETF about a proposal for Mobile
>IPv4 re-charter may be of interest to your working group members.
>
>Paul
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: new-work-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:new-work-bounces@ietf.org] On
>Behalf Of IESG Secretary
>Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 2:42 PM
>To: new-work@ietf.org
>Subject: [New-work] WG Review: Recharter of Mobility for IPv4 (mip4)
>
>A modified charter has been submitted for the Mobility for IPv4 (mip4)
>working group in the Internet Area of the IETF. The IESG has not made
>any determination as yet. The modified charter is provided below for
>informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the IESG
>mailing list
>(iesg@ietf.org) by October 26th.
>
>+++
>
>Mobility for IPv4 (mip4)
>------------------------
>
>Current Status: Active Working Group
>
>Chair(s):
>Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
>Pete McCann <mccap@lucent.com>
>
>Internet Area Director(s):
>Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com> Mark Townsley
><townsley@cisco.com>
>
>Mailing list: mip4@ietf.org
>To Subscribe: mip4-request@ietf.org ;
>In Body or Subject: subscribe
>
>Archive: https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/mip4/current/
>
>DESCRIPTION:
>
>IP mobility support for IPv4 nodes (hosts and routers) is specified in
>RFC3344. RFC 3344 mobility allows a node to continue using its
>"permanent" home address as it moves around the internet. The Mobile IP
>protocols support transparency above the IP layer, including maintenance
>of active TCP connections and UDP port bindings. Besides the basic
>Mobile IPv4 (MIPv4) protocols, several other drafts deal with concerns
>such as optimization, security, extensions, AAA support, and deployment
>issues.
>
>Mobile IPv4 is currently being deployed on a wide basis (e.g., in
>cdma2000 networks). The scope of the deployment is on a fairly large
>scale and accordingly, the MIP4 WG will focus on deployment issues and
>on addressing known deficiencies and shortcomings in the protocol that
>have come up as a result of deployment experience. Specifically, the
>working group will complete the work items to facilitate interactions
>with AAA environments, interactions with enterprise environments when
>Mobile IPv4 is used therein, and updating existing protocol
>specifications in accordance with deployment needs and advancing those
>protocols that are on the standards track.
>
>Work expected to be done by the MIP4 WG as proposed by this charter is
>as follows:
>
>
>1. MIPv4 has been a proposed standard for several years. It has been
>adopted by other standard development organizations and has been
>deployed commercially. One of the next steps for the WG is to advance
>the protocol to draft standard status. As part of advancing base Mobile
>IP specs to DS, the Mobile IPv4 NAI RFC (2794) will be revised to
>reflect implementation experience.
>
>2. Work items that are pending from the previous Mobile IP WG, which
>will be completed by the MIP4 WG, are:
>
>- completion of the MIB for the revised base Mobile IP specification
>(2006bis)
>
>- regional registration draft.
>
>3. The MIP4 WG will also complete the work on Mobile IPv4 interactions
>in VPN scenarios. This work will involve identifying the requirements
>and a solution development for Mobile IPv4 operation in the presence of
>IPsec VPNs.
>
>4. Additionally, a proposal has been made for how MOBIKE could work
>together with MIPv4. This proposal does not describe any new protocol,
>but formulates a best current practice for deploying MOBIKE together
>with MIPv4. The working group will adopt and complete this document.
>
>5. Some issues have been raised with respect to RFC3519. These will be
>identified and addressed as appropriate, through errata, revision of RFC
>3519, and/or supplemental documents as needed.
>
>6. It has been proposed that the FMIP protocol, which has been
>standardised for MIPv6 in the MIPSHOP working group, should also be
>published as an experimental protocol for MIPv4. A draft for this
>exists. The working group will take up and carry this work forward to
>publication
>
>7. An extension to carry generic strings in the Registration Reply
>message has been proposed. The purpose is to supply supplemental
>human-readable information intended to the MN user. The working group
>will complete the specification and applicability statement of such an
>extension.
>
>8. RADIUS attributes for Mobile IP v4. A set of RADIUS attributes has
>been proposed for MIPv4. The working group will complete the
>specification of what is needed by MIPv4 in this respect, solicit
>feedback from the Radius Extensions WG, adjust, and submit this for
>publication. The set of attributes should as much as feasible match what
>is specified in the Diameter Mobile IPv4 Application document.
>
>9. MIPv4 Extension for Configuration Options. Several drafts have
>proposed extensions to help improve configuration of MIPv4 clients.
>The latest proposal is for a general configuration option extension,
>which could carry information such as e.g., DNS address and DHCP server
>address. The working group will take on and complete one proposal for a
>configuration option extension.
>
>Goals and Milestones:
>
>====== =============================================================
>When What
>====== =============================================================
>Done AAA Keys for MIPv4 to IESG
>Done MIPv4 VPN interaction problem statement to IESG Done Low latency
>handover to experimental Done Experimental MIPv4 message and extensions
>draft to IESG Done Dynamic Home Agent assignment protocol solution to
>IESG Done? Regional registration document to IESG Aug 05 Revised MIPv4
>Challenge/Response (3012bis) to IESG Dec 05 Revised MIB for MIPv4 to
>IESG Sep 05 Revised MIPv4 specification to IESG for Draft Standard Dec
>05 Revised rfc2794bis (NAI extension specification) to the IESG Jan 06
>MIPv4 Mobike interaction BCP to the IESG Feb 06 Generic Strings for
>MIPv4 to the IESG Mar 06 RADIUS Extensions for MIPv4 to the RADEXT WG
>for comment Mar 06 FMIPv4 to the IESG Jun 06 RADIUS Extensions for MIPv4
>to the IESG Aug 06 MIPv4 Extension for Configuration Options to the IESG
>
>_______________________________________________
>New-work mailing list
>New-work@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/new-work
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.