Experimental Scenarios of Information-Centric Networking (ICN) Integration in 4G Mobile Networks
draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-12
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2022-08-17
|
12 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48 |
2022-07-22
|
12 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 |
2022-06-21
|
12 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT |
2022-05-17
|
Tina Dang | Posted related IPR disclosure Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2022-05-17
|
Tina Dang | Posted related IPR disclosure Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2022-05-17
|
Tina Dang | Posted related IPR disclosure Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2022-05-10
|
12 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to EDIT |
2022-05-10
|
12 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IANA Actions from In Progress |
2022-05-10
|
12 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2022-05-10
|
12 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to Sent to the RFC Editor from In IESG Review |
2022-05-10
|
12 | Colin Perkins | Sent request for publication to the RFC Editor |
2022-04-22
|
12 | Colin Perkins | Tag IESG Review Completed set. |
2022-04-13
|
Tina Dang | Posted related IPR disclosure Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2022-04-13
|
Tina Dang | Posted related IPR disclosure Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2022-03-21
|
12 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
2022-03-21
|
12 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-12.txt |
2022-03-21
|
12 | (System) | New version approved |
2022-03-21
|
12 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Milan Stolic , Prakash suthar , icnrg-chairs@ietf.org, irtf-chair@irtf.org |
2022-03-21
|
12 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2022-02-22
|
11 | Amanda Baber | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
2022-02-22
|
11 | Amanda Baber | (Via drafts-eval@iana.org): IESG/Authors/ISE: The IANA Functions Operator has reviewed draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-11 and has the following comments: We understand that this document doesn't require any registry … (Via drafts-eval@iana.org): IESG/Authors/ISE: The IANA Functions Operator has reviewed draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-11 and has the following comments: We understand that this document doesn't require any registry actions. While it's often helpful for a document's IANA Considerations section to remain in place upon publication even if there are no actions, if the authors strongly prefer to remove it, we do not object. If this assessment is not accurate, please respond as soon as possible. Thank you, Amanda Baber IANA Operations Manager |
2022-02-22
|
11 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to In IESG Review from Awaiting IRSG Reviews |
2022-02-22
|
11 | Colin Perkins | IETF conflict review initiated - see conflict-review-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g |
2022-01-28
|
11 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-11.txt |
2022-01-28
|
11 | (System) | New version approved |
2022-01-28
|
11 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Milan Stolic , Prakash suthar |
2022-01-28
|
11 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2021-08-09
|
10 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to Awaiting IRSG Reviews from Waiting for Document Shepherd |
2021-07-30
|
10 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-10.txt |
2021-07-30
|
10 | (System) | New version approved |
2021-07-30
|
10 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Milan Stolic , Prakash suthar |
2021-07-30
|
10 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2021-02-22
|
09 | (System) | Revised ID Needed tag cleared |
2021-02-22
|
09 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-09.txt |
2021-02-22
|
09 | (System) | New version approved |
2021-02-22
|
09 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Milan Stolic , Prakash suthar , Ravi Ravindran , icnrg-chairs@ietf.org, … Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Milan Stolic , Prakash suthar , Ravi Ravindran , icnrg-chairs@ietf.org, irtf-chair@irtf.org |
2021-02-22
|
09 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2021-01-26
|
08 | (System) | Document has expired |
2020-10-12
|
08 | Colin Perkins | Tag Revised I-D Needed set. |
2020-10-12
|
08 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to Waiting for Document Shepherd from In IRSG Poll |
2020-10-12
|
08 | Colin Perkins | Closed "IRSG Approve" ballot |
2020-08-17
|
08 | Mat Ford | [Ballot comment] I have no objection to this document being published in the IRTF stream. I agree with others that the charter of the ICNRG … [Ballot comment] I have no objection to this document being published in the IRTF stream. I agree with others that the charter of the ICNRG may be due for an update to take account of the ICN-over-foo, uses of ICN and ICN applications work that is all underway now. I also agree that the audience for this document may be closer to 3GPP than the IETF, but there is quite some history of publishing 3GPP-related information in the IETF so again I don't see that as a big problem here (if the IRTF has an ICN research group, then (modulo charter update) ICN-over-foo research seems like fair game to me). |
2020-08-17
|
08 | Mat Ford | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mat Ford |
2020-08-12
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot comment] I entered "no objection" as ballot position because I don't think there is any harm in publishing this document in the RFC series … [Ballot comment] I entered "no objection" as ballot position because I don't think there is any harm in publishing this document in the RFC series but looking at Lars' comment I wonder what the intend of the document is and if the RFC series is the right place to publish. I guess the question is who is the intended audience? I guess it's more for the 3GPP community to read than for the IETF/IRTF community as such it would make more sense to publish this information in one of their venues. Also, are people in 3GPP aware? And how is the relation of the content of this document to on-going effects in this space in 3GPP? Connected to this, I also looked at the charter and my reading is that it is mainly focused on comparing different approaches proposed in research. I believe the group went already far beyond that and maybe it's time to consider rechartering. I also wonder about this sentence in the abstract: "Multicast and broadcast technologies have recently emerged for mobile networks, but their deployments are very limited or at an experimental stage. " Isn't that also true for ICN? As such I find the motivation why ICN is beneficial in mobile networks rather weak... One more concrete comment: In section 3.2. you mention type of service (ToS). Please note that RFC1349 is obsoleted by RFC2474, therefore I recommend strongly to remove any notion of ToS from this document. However, I do find this section anyway rather weak as you say ICN is intended to solve this but then just say it needs further research. I'd potentially rather remove the whole section. And one minor comment: Maybe spell out TCO in section 3.4? |
2020-08-12
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | Ballot comment text updated for Mirja Kühlewind |
2020-08-12
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot comment] I enter "no objection" as ballot position because I don't think there is any harm in publishing this document in the RFC series … [Ballot comment] I enter "no objection" as ballot position because I don't think there is any harm in publishing this document in the RFC series but looking at Lars' comment I wonder what the intend of the document is and if the RFC series is the right place to publish. I guess the question is who is the intended audience? I guess it more for the 3GPP community to read than for the IETF/IRTF community as such it would make more sense to publish this information in one or their venues. Also are people in 3GPP aware? And how is the relation of the content of this document to on-going effects in this space in 3GPP? Connected to this, I also looked at the charter and my reading is that it is mainly focused on comparing different approaches proposed in research. I believe the group went already far beyond that and maybe it's time to consider rechartering. I also wonder about this sentence in the abstract: "Multicast and broadcast technologies have recently emerged for mobile networks, but their deployments are very limited or at an experimental stage. " Isn't that also true for ICN? As such I find the motivation why ICN is beneficial in mobile networks rather weak... One more concrete comment: In section 3.2. you mention type of service (ToS). Please note that RFC1349 is obsoleted by RFC2474, therefore I recommend strongly to remove any notion of ToS from this document. However, I do find this section anyway rather weak as you say ICN is intended to solve this but then just say it needs further research. I'd potentially rather remove the whole section. And one minor comment: Maybe spell out TCO in section 3.4? |
2020-08-12
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mirja Kühlewind |
2020-08-11
|
08 | Shivan Sahib | [Ballot comment] Not an expert on ICN, but I looked at the new privacy considerations section (thanks for including it). There are several risks introduced … [Ballot comment] Not an expert on ICN, but I looked at the new privacy considerations section (thanks for including it). There are several risks introduced specific to the deployment models as outlined in this section. Both the security and privacy sections end with "more research is needed". While this would always be true, it would be good to not punt these important discussions down the road too much - it would be great to see expansion of the points brought up; for e.g. "[ICNoICN scenario] ... forwarder in the path could be a potential risk for privacy attack" could be expanded more - what would this attack look like? How could it be mitigated? Can it be mitigated? Are there censorship and anonymity attacks possible for point 3? I'm also having trouble understanding some of the conclusions. For instance, "... a mere presence of the TCL does not present increased risk and vulnerability." But it does, right? If the TCL did not exist there wouldn't be any privacy risks related to ICN. Also, "introduction of TCL as a vehicle to implement ICN in LTE does not present additional privacy risk beyond issues already identified as they apply to ICN in general" - but now because of the deployments mentioned in this document those privacy risks would apply to LTE/4G as well. It's great that the point that privacy issues have a way of compounding rather than being additive seems to be well understood - it's worthwhile to examine the privacy risks not just from an ICN-specific point of view but also the privacy risks that are unique to the combination of ICN+4G/LTE. |
2020-08-11
|
08 | Shivan Sahib | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Recuse, has been recorded for Shivan Sahib |
2020-08-11
|
08 | Mallory Knodel | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Mallory Knodel |
2020-08-11
|
08 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot comment] > Native Deployment of ICN in LTE, 4G Mobile Networks I don't quite understand why the IRTF (where the I is for Internet) … [Ballot comment] > Native Deployment of ICN in LTE, 4G Mobile Networks I don't quite understand why the IRTF (where the I is for Internet) should be publishing a document that describes how to deploy a non-Internet networking technology in another SDO's non-Internet architecture... Has 3GPP reviewed this document? Would they be surprised to see this published by the IRTF? s/IPSec/IPsec/g > This transport > convergence layer helps determine the type of transport (such as ICN > or IP), as well as the type of radio interface (LTE or WiFi or both) > used to send and receive traffic based on preference (e.g., content > location, content type, content publisher, congestion, cost, QoS). Where will this TCL come from and what are the incremental incentives for applications to move to it? |
2020-08-11
|
08 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Recuse, has been recorded for Lars Eggert |
2020-08-10
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot comment] Thanks for doing this work. I like it, and it's well-written. I have a couple of comments you might take into account. "Dual … [Ballot comment] Thanks for doing this work. I like it, and it's well-written. I have a couple of comments you might take into account. "Dual stack IP or ICN" seems to be an unfortunate choice of terms - "dual stack" is used to refer to "IP or ICN", but that's confusing, and even more confusing when it's used for "Dual stack IP (IPv4/IPv6) or ICN", which I guess should be read as nested "Dual stack (Dual stack (IP (IPv4/IPv6)) or ICN)", since both IPv4/IPv6 and the combination of IP or ICN are "dual stacks". Is there any other term you could use that wouldn't collide with a term that's been in wide use for at least 25 years (it's in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1933)? This text LTE uses IP transport in its mobile backhaul (between eNodeB and core network). In case of provider-owned backhaul, it may not be necessary to implement any security mechanisms because the entire IP transport is owned by service provider. Deployment of security gateways and encryption might be necessary when IP transport is provided by other provider as shared media or leased lines. seems awfully optimistic in 2020. Even if true, I'd have concerns about saying it out loud - I was getting objections to similar text in the early 2000s. Fortunately, I think you can drop the second and third sentences with no lack of coherence, and no one with a 4G/LTE network is going to be reading this document to find out how to secure their IP networks, anyway. Do the right thing, of course. |
2020-08-10
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins |
2020-08-10
|
08 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to In IRSG Poll from IRSG Review |
2020-08-10
|
08 | Colin Perkins | Created IRSG Ballot |
2020-07-26
|
08 | Colin Perkins | Mallory Knodel review -07; waiting confirmation -08 addresses review comments. |
2020-07-26
|
08 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to IRSG Review from Waiting for Document Shepherd |
2020-07-25
|
08 | (System) | Revised ID Needed tag cleared |
2020-07-25
|
08 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-08.txt |
2020-07-25
|
08 | (System) | New version approved |
2020-07-25
|
08 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Prakash suthar , Dirk Trossen , Anil Jangam , Milan Stolic , Ravi Ravindran |
2020-07-25
|
08 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2020-07-13
|
07 | Colin Perkins | Revised draft needed to address IRSG review comments from Mallory Knodel (2020-06-26) |
2020-07-13
|
07 | Colin Perkins | Tag Revised I-D Needed set. |
2020-07-13
|
07 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to Waiting for Document Shepherd from Awaiting IRSG Reviews |
2020-06-23
|
07 | Colin Perkins | Sent for IRSG review 2020-06-23 |
2020-06-23
|
07 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to Awaiting IRSG Reviews from Waiting for Document Shepherd |
2020-06-23
|
07 | Colin Perkins | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2020-05-25
|
07 | (System) | Revised ID Needed tag cleared |
2020-05-25
|
07 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-07.txt |
2020-05-25
|
07 | (System) | New version approved |
2020-05-25
|
07 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Ravi Ravindran , Anil Jangam , Milan Stolic , Dirk Trossen , Prakash suthar |
2020-05-25
|
07 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2020-05-25
|
06 | Colin Perkins | Tag Revised I-D Needed set. |
2020-05-07
|
06 | (System) | Revised ID Needed tag cleared |
2020-05-07
|
06 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-06.txt |
2020-05-07
|
06 | (System) | New version approved |
2020-05-07
|
06 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Prakash suthar , Ravi Ravindran , irtf-chair@irtf.org, icnrg-chairs@ietf.org, Milan … Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Anil Jangam , Dirk Trossen , Prakash suthar , Ravi Ravindran , irtf-chair@irtf.org, icnrg-chairs@ietf.org, Milan Stolic |
2020-05-07
|
06 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2020-05-07
|
05 | (System) | Document has expired |
2020-03-17
|
05 | Colin Perkins | Tag Revised I-D Needed set. |
2020-03-17
|
05 | Colin Perkins | IRTF state changed to Waiting for Document Shepherd from Waiting for IRTF Chair |
2020-01-16
|
05 | David Oran | Colin - Please start IRSG review of this. See the Shepherd writeup for details. Thanks! |
2020-01-16
|
05 | David Oran | IRTF state changed to Waiting for IRTF Chair from Active RG Document |
2020-01-16
|
05 | David Oran | This document finished ICNRG Last Call at the end of October, 2019. Support from the RG participants for advancing this work was strong, and confirmed … This document finished ICNRG Last Call at the end of October, 2019. Support from the RG participants for advancing this work was strong, and confirmed with a brief discussion at the Singapore ICNRG meeting. Last Call comments were received from Dave Oran and Martin Reed. Their comments, with the exception of a small editorial correction by Martin, have been incorporated in the current draft. (The ICNRG chairs determined that rather than delay, the editorial corrections can be incorporated after IRSG review). Both commenters have confirmed that they are happy with the resulting document and support progressing to IRSG Review. Note that there is an IPR disclosure on this document. See https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3702/. However, the RG participants did not see any barriers based on this to continuing to advance the document to publication. |
2020-01-16
|
05 | David Oran | Notification list changed to David Oran <daveoran@orandom.net> |
2020-01-16
|
05 | David Oran | Document shepherd changed to David R. Oran |
2019-11-04
|
05 | Milan Stolic | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-05.txt |
2019-11-04
|
05 | (System) | New version approved |
2019-11-04
|
05 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Ravi Ravindran , Prakash suthar , Milan Stolic , Dirk Trossen , Anil Jangam |
2019-11-04
|
05 | Milan Stolic | Uploaded new revision |
2019-09-11
|
Jenny Bui | Posted related IPR disclosure: IDAC Holdings, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2019-09-11
|
Jenny Bui | Posted related IPR disclosure: IDAC Holdings, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g | |
2019-09-09
|
04 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-04.txt |
2019-09-09
|
04 | (System) | New version approved |
2019-09-09
|
04 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Ravi Ravindran , Prakash suthar , Milan Stolic , Dirk Trossen , Anil Jangam |
2019-09-09
|
04 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2019-03-10
|
03 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-03.txt |
2019-03-10
|
03 | (System) | New version approved |
2019-03-10
|
03 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Ravi Ravindran , Prakash suthar , Milan Stolic , Dirk Trossen , Anil Jangam |
2019-03-10
|
03 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2018-10-22
|
02 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-02.txt |
2018-10-22
|
02 | (System) | New version approved |
2018-10-22
|
02 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Ravi Ravindran , Prakash suthar , Milan Stolic , Dirk Trossen , Anil Jangam |
2018-10-22
|
02 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |
2018-07-11
|
01 | David Oran | Added to session: IETF-102: icnrg Tue-1550 |
2018-07-02
|
01 | Milan Stolic | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-01.txt |
2018-07-02
|
01 | (System) | New version approved |
2018-07-02
|
01 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Ravi Ravindran , Prakash suthar , Milan Stolic , Dirk Trossen , Anil Jangam |
2018-07-02
|
01 | Milan Stolic | Uploaded new revision |
2018-03-19
|
00 | David Oran | Added to session: IETF-101: icnrg Tue-1550 |
2018-02-04
|
00 | David Oran | IRTF state changed to Active RG Document |
2018-02-04
|
00 | David Oran | This document now replaces draft-suthar-icnrg-icn-lte-4g instead of None |
2018-02-04
|
00 | David Oran | Intended Status changed to Informational from None |
2018-02-04
|
00 | Anil Jangam | New version available: draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-00.txt |
2018-02-04
|
00 | (System) | WG -00 approved |
2018-02-03
|
00 | Anil Jangam | Set submitter to "Anil Jangam ", replaces to (none) and sent approval email to group chairs: icnrg-chairs@ietf.org |
2018-02-03
|
00 | Anil Jangam | Uploaded new revision |