RE: [16NG] ARP over IEEE 802.16 IPvCS (was 16NG] 68-IETF minutes)

Hi ,

I also am not clear on the issues with ARP comments in IPv4CS  document
as Syam mentioned below.

Can someone please clarify ? Please see in-line.

>From 16ng minutes:

....

Bernard Aboba: if Ethernet exposes an Ethernet interface then DNA
triggered.
then DHCP, so ARP is sent, then you figure out what to do
Bernard Aboba: problem dropping ARPs - you wont get an address if you do

that, because in DNA you don't dhcp. no connectivity if dropping the
arp.
In any operating system you'll have no address

[SC>] 

Is the concern with DNAv4 running on a mobile node ? I assume the node
tries to do autoconf with IPv4 link-local address  by sending a unicast
packet to the default router and for that it needs to ARP for the MAC
address of the router?

Is the concern on dropping ARP on the receiver side or not being able to
send an ARP at all or both?

Dave Thaler: respond to any MAC address, sounds as if what you're
proposing, 
manufcature ARP response... ARP goes on wire 
Bernard Aboba: not get DHCP but get (MAC) address

[SC>] 

Can DNA of a mobile get a hint from the link layer that it is now in
Wimax (802.16e) link and then it should try to get its address assigned
according to the Wimax network (DHCP)? (Assuming the node has moved from
Wifi to Wimax network, for example).  The DHCP address is assigned
usually by the ASN network.  So if the concern is in initial IP-address
allocation, that might be handled by Wimax network.  But, if there is no
address resolution, then how does a node send a packet to its logical
neighboring node ? It looks like the ASN-GW or default-router in the
network or some central body needs to do the mapping between an
IP-address to CID of  the destination node.  Thus ARP request could be
directly sent to the default GW which will act as a proxy and send back
a reply with a CID of the corresponding IP-address(assuming the default
gw has a cache of all nodes attached to it).  The model is similar to
what is described in:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-03
.txt

Comments?

Thanks,

-Samita
....

These minutes are recorded for the presentation of  the ID

draft-madanapalli-16ng-over-802-dot-16-ipcs-00

I did not understand these comments, especially Ethernet in the IPv4CS
context,

Sorry I was not present at the meeting. 

The proposal is:

As IP is run directly over 802.16 in case of IPv4 and destination MAC
address is

not required for sending the frames, there is no need for ARP.

Also, ARP frame does not has a IP header, so IPv4CS cannot map these
onto

any CID.

Or did I miss something?

Thank you,

Syam

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Daniel Park <soohongp@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 17, 2007 12:22 AM 
Subject: [16NG] 68-IETF minutes
To: "16ng@ietf.org" <16ng@ietf.org>

Can be found at:
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07mar/minutes/16ng.txt

Let me know if you see any bugs in there.

-- Daniel Park

_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
16NG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng