Hi, Paul:
Yes, I agree with you.
More importantly, contributions are there explaining the benefits: D.354, MD-017, and MD-018. Many emails have also been sent explaining the benefits.
Interestingly, no one (absolutely no one) has brought a SINGLE contribution explaining the problems for those terms.
Best regards, Radhika R. Roy AT&T
-----Original Message----- From: Guram Paul-LPG019 [SMTP:lpg019@email.mot.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 11:19 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: 17 April Mobility Conf call notes
Hi all
The reason why the use of the word 'home' is somewhat acceptable to me for use with zone (and hence gatekeeper) is what Jaakko has explained, i.e. a user subscribes to his administrative domain, which is called the home administrative domain. Thus one could extend the use of this word for zone and gatekeeper. Whilst this would seem reasonable, as I understood yesterday, if during further discussions we see no real merit in identifying a zone or gatekeeper with such a label then we will remove 'home' from the figure, i.e. the word home will only have meaning in Annex H when used in home location function, home administrative domain (and later on, when we get to it, virtual home environment).
Paul
-----Original Message----- From: Jaakko Sundquist[mailto:jaakko.sundquist@NOKIA.COM] Sent: 18 April 2000 16:06 To: ITU-SG16@mailbag.cps.intel.com Subject: Re: 17 April Mobility Conf call notes
Hi Radhika & Laurent, See my comments embedded... > > The contributions and explanations have been providedwhy > "Home" is needed > in the same context of "Home" domain.
The Home Administrative Domain came about because itseemed 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 homenetwork > 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 ahome 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 theword > 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 Laurentcorrectly, 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 likeit, > 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 termsSHOULD 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