Re: Internal WG Review: MIPv6 Signaling and Handoff Optimization (mipshop)

["James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>]

Bernard,

> I hope that MIPSHOP is not continuing this tradition of "design before
> thinking" but based on the discussion so far, I'm concerned.
>

One of the reasons for separating out this work from the base MIPv6 WG was
to get the basic signaling into a publishable form quickly, so that
attention could be paid to exactly the issues you raise that have not been
successfully addressed in the MIPv6 WG. In addition to security, there are
other such issues.

> At some point, some where, we are going to have to get a group of people
to
> sit down, and help us develop the technology with which we will solve
these
> problems, instead of just experimenting.  And so far I don't see what the
> plan is for accomplishing that.
>

The IRTF mobility research group was intended to provide the framework for
that work. This might involve developing the technology to some prototype
phase and not just experimenting. Previously, it was not seen as an IRTF
item because the work was proceeding in the MIPv6 WG. That is the plan as I
understand it. If you see something missing, please speak up.

Now, this plan is predicated on having a dedicated group of people who have
the time and interest to work on the hard problems in the IRTF. And work on
these problems in a spirit of friendly competition, with a willingness to
admit when design ideas that they've proposed won't work and new approaches
are necessary. In the MIPv6 WG, there has been a tendency to push broken
ideas even in the face of evidence that they wouldn't work, because, I
strongly suspect, of the prospect of getting one's name on a Proposed
Standard. As evidence to back up that assertion, I'd like to point to the
hue and cry that went up from the authors of the specs that were moved to
Experimental by the ADs and MIP WG chairs when the proposal for mipshop was
first brought up. Moving the work to the IRTF would in theory remove any
incentive for such eogistic stonewalling.

            jak