Re: [16NG] Resolutions to issues raised during 2nd WGLC of I-D draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs-04 [2]

[Basavaraj Patil <[e-mail]>]

Alex, 

Let me just say that in the current realizations of 802.16, the secondary
management connection is not used for either configuration or for sending
RAs or sending router solicitations.
Essentially the secondary management connection is not used at all.

It is true that IEEE 802.16 defines the secondary management connection but
is not mandatory that it be used.

A transport connection that is established for IPv6 is used for RA/RS,
DHCPv6 and everything else.

-Raj

On 1/12/07 11:52 AM, "ext Alexandru Petrescu"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Basavaraj Patil wrote:
>> Alex,
>> 
>> Inline:
>> 
>> 
>> On 1/12/07 10:57 AM, "ext Alexandru Petrescu"
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi, please allow me to interfere with clarifications.
>>> 
>>> Basavaraj Patil wrote:
>>>> Comments by Bruno Sousa:
>>> [skip parts I agree]
>>>>> 4) IPv6 link in 802.16 " In 802.16, there exists an L2
>>>>> Transport Connection between an MS and a BS which is used to
>>>>> transport user data, i.e IPv6 packets in this case.  A
>>>>> Transport Connection is represented by a CID (Connection
>>>>> Identifier) and multiple Transport Connections can exist
>>>>> between an MS and BS. " I think the first sentence is somehow
>>>>> contradictory with the rest of the paragraph. It is possible to
>>>>>  have more then one transport connection between MS and BS.
>>>>> These transport connections are defined on the MAC layer (L2),
>>>>> so why refer "there exists an L2 Transport Connection?!"
>>>>> 
>>>>> (If my thoughts are correct) I propose to change the first
>>>>> sentence to:
>>>>> 
>>>>> In 802.16, the Transport Connection between an MS and a BS is
>>>>> used to transport user data, i.e. IPv6 packets in this case.
>>>> Agreed. Incorporated the proposed sentence.
>>> But there are IPv6 packets that are sent on the Secondary
>>> Management Connection as well (RS/RA at least) 6.3.9.10
>>> 802.16e-2005.  I suggest saying that only _some_ of the IPv6
>>> packets are transported on some Transport Connection, or along
>>> these lines.
>> 
>> The secondary management connection is typically not used for user
>> data. As the .16 spec says it can be used for address configuration,
>> TFTP etc.
> 
> Not only that it can but it must, by that spec
> 
>> Also to be noted is the fact that secondary management connections
>> are not mandatorily required. The usage for which it has been defined
>>  can be accomplished via a regular transport connection.
> 
> I don't think the 802.16 spec says anywhere that RS/RA could be sent on
> anything else than Secondary Management Connection.  Do you?
> 
>>> From a practical standapoint, I do not see hosts or BS'
>>> implementing or using the secondary management connection. So I can
>>>  mention it in the text of the I-D, but it would not be very
>>> useful.
>>> 
>> 
>>> Probably best for reader would be to enumerate the different types
>>> of Connections the SS can handle and where do IPv6 packets appear.
>>> What do you think?
>> 
>> I don't think we should get into the details of the various types of
>>  connections in the I-D. The reference to the .16 spec is sufficient
>>  for that. But I can mention that there does exist the secondary
>> management connection which may be used for host configuration with a
>>  caveat that for all practical purposes it is better to use a
>> transport connection for the same.
>> 
>> The reason why the secondary management connection does not make
>> sense is because it is limited in its capability. Establishing a
>> transport connection instead allows you to do the same host
>> configuration as well as use it for user traffic.
> 
> I am afraid the 802.16 spec clearly says RS/RA only happen on the
> Secondary Management Connection and we can't suggest do it otherwise.
> 
> Alex
> 


_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng