The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'WiMAX Forum/3GPP2 Proxy Mobile IPv4' <draft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode-09.txt> as an Informational RFC. The IESG would also like the RFC-Editor to review the comments in the datatracker (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=14357&rfc_flag=0) 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: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-leung-mip4-proxy-mode-09.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary 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 draft. IESG Note 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. IANA Note Please ensure that the Expert review is performed on the requested allocations. _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
