Hi, Laurent:
Please see the earlier emails sent by me, Ed, and Paul as well.
I guess that you are not understanding the other side of the coin. It has
been explained earlier.
No one is saying where the "services" to be EXECUTED using some mandatory
criteria. You are jumping much ahead of everyone by saying that home CSCF
will be used to execute the services. Who knows ahead of time how many ways
a service can be executed? We are NOT standardizing "services" per se. We
are standardizing the protocol to support mobility. We MUST Not be MANDATING
that the protocol should be used to execute a service in a given way. We
MUST not be mandating how a HLF will accessed by using ONLY a given
particular call flow (for example, AT&T's contributions show 3 different
ways, while your contribution shows only one way for a particular scenario).
A protocol can used to create many services depending on the relationship
between the service providers and users. No one should ever dream to
"hard-wire" a protocol feature for execution of services. It will be totally
against the "norm" of development of the protocol.
The important point is that a subscriber needs to store some information:
Home/Visited/Visiting/Target GK/zone/network address (point of attachment).
It is an OPTION. If you do not like this, you are NOT forced to use it. It
is your choice.
Who has given the right that a subscriber will NOT be able to register the
information related Home/Visited/Visiting/Target GK/zone/network address
(point of attachment) if they want to? This information, like all other
parameters, will be stored in the HLF/VLF as appropriate.
Contributions are there: D.354, MD-017, and MD-018 in explaining the
benefits and subsequent emails have also explained (please also see Ed's and
Paul Guram's emails) the benefits that could be realized. If Alcatel does
NOT want to use those OPTIONs, no one will force it. It is your choice.
As I explained yesterday's conference (also Ed explained in his email),
there is very little value to use term like home adm domain unless the
information like
Home/Visited/Visiting/Target GK/zone/network address (point of attachment)
is stored in the HLF/VLF as appropriate.
So, if people disagree with this concept, contributions are needed to
understand. So far, no one has provided any contributions in explaining the
things why they are opposing the concept. In fact, like AT&T, Motorola has
also submitted contribution in supporting the concept of
Home/Visited/Visiting/Target GK/zone/network address (point of attachment).
Hope this will clarify further. If you need to have any more clarifications,
please let me or other know.
Best regards,
Radhika R. Roy
AT&T
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laurent Thiebaut [SMTP:Laurent.Thiebaut@ALCATEL.FR]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 10:34 AM
> To: ITU-SG16(a)MAILBAG.INTEL.COM
> Subject: Re: 17 April Mobility Conf call notes
>
> I support Jaakko's comments:
> the notion of Home is needed (at least for subscription information
> storage and for central place that knows which GK/VLF is currently hosting
> an user: HLF )
> In some configurations, service needs to be executed in the Home
> domain. This does not mean that it has to be executed in a Home CSCF
> It is not contributions telling "what terms SHOULD NOT be defined", but
> contributions telling "why some terms SHOULD be defined" that are needed.
> Best regards
> Laurent T.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> V Laurent Thiebaut tel: +33 (0)1 3077 0645
> A L C A T E L e.mail:laurent.thiebaut@alcatel.fr
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>
>
>
>
> Jaakko Sundquist <jaakko.sundquist(a)NOKIA.COM> on 18/04/2000 16:06:17
>
> Please respond to Mailing list for parties associated with ITU-T Study
> Group 16 <ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com>
>
>
>
> To: ITU-SG16(a)mailbag.cps.intel.com
>
> cc: (bcc: Laurent THIEBAUT/FR/ALCATEL)
>
>
>
> Subject: Re: 17 April Mobility Conf call notes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Radhika & Laurent,
>
> See my comments embedded...
>
> >
> > The contributions and explanations have been provided why
> > "Home" is needed
> > in the same context of "Home" domain.
>
> The Home Administrative Domain came about because it seemed a good idea to
> bind the subscription of a User to some administrative entity (such as an
> operator). At the same time we have defined the HLF as the only place in
> which location information about the user can always be found (albeit
> clearer definitions about this information are still needed). Thus the
> domain containing the HLF of the user was in effect defined as the Home
> Administrative Domain of the user.
>
> >
> > If we do not accept the "home" for GK, zone and home network
> > address, we
> > have serious problems to accept the word "home" in any place
> > of mobility
> > whether it is "home" Adm domain.
>
> I do not follow your reasoning above at all. Concidering a home GK or
> zone,
> I can understand that they may be needed if the service execution is done
> in
> the "home" of the user, i.e. all calls for a user would be controlled by
> the
> same GK, namely the home GK of the user. For service execution in the
> Visited Administrative Domain, I do not see any reason, why the concept of
> a
> home GK would be needed. Furthermore, if a concept is not definitely
> needed,
> I will not want to define it. I also feel we need to examine and define
> the
> "service execution in the home environment" or "virtual home environment"
> model better, so that everyone understands, what it is all about.
> As for the need for a home Network Point of Attachment, I am waiting for
> your contribution that clarifies, why we would need it.
>
> >
> > I have very a serious objection with your idea that the word
> > home should not
> > be used. If it is so, let us NOT use "home" anywhere in the document.
>
> The point is that so far, if I understand Laurent correctly, neither he or
> I
> have accepted the concepts of home GK or home Network Point of Attachment.
> Those are the terms that we would not like to see in the picture.
>
> >
> > It is an OPTION to use "home". If anyone does NOT like it,
> > they may NOT use
> > it. Time and again, it has been shown why it is needed.
> >
> > It will be very difficult to make any meaningful progress
> > unless we are in
> > consistent in defining term terms.
> >
> > I like to see contributions explaining why "Home" should NOT be used.
> >
>
> I do not want to see contributions telling what terms SHOULD NOT be
> defined,
> I want to see contributions telling why some terms SHOULD be defined. So
> far
> I haven't seen such contributions on home NPoA and I'm still not sure
> about
> the home GK either.
>
> -Jaakko
