RE: [16NG] Fw:I-DACTION:draft-madanapalli-16ng-ipv4-over-802-dot-16-ipcs-00.txt

How can the MS and AR send ARP requests and responses to each other?
These ARP messages have to go over IPCS and there is no IP packet in
this case.

If there is concern for a legacy IPv4 stack at the MS sending ARP
requests and perhaps even requiring ARP responses, why not recommend a
shim layer between the IPv4 stack and the 802.16 IPCS layer at the MS.
This layer would filter ARP requests arriving from the IPv4 stack and
respond with any MAC address. The IPCS classifier should never see ARP
messages, and they should never be sent over the air.

Regards,
Paolo

________________________________

	From: Behcet Sarikaya [mailto:behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com] 
	Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 2:19 PM
	To: Syam Madanapalli
	Cc: 16ng@ietf.org
	Subject: Re: [16NG]
Fw:I-DACTION:draft-madanapalli-16ng-ipv4-over-802-dot-16-ipcs-00.txt

	Hi Syam,
	  You mentioned P2P link here in this message but I could not
see any text on this in the draft. Maybe a section should be added on
the address and subnet mask assignment given the P2P nature of the link
and the fact that such assignments are not commonly used.
	  You recommended AR to ignore ARP Requests from MS, I am not
sure if this is OK or a Reply would be needed according to ARP?

	Regards,

	Behcet

	----- Original Message ----
	From: Syam Madanapalli <smadanapalli@gmail.com>
	To: "Narvaez, Paolo (Paolo)" <paolo@alcatel-lucent.com>
	Cc: 16ng@ietf.org
	Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 12:34:46 AM
	Subject: Re: [16NG] Fw:
I-DACTION:draft-madanapalli-16ng-ipv4-over-802-dot-16-ipcs-00.txt

	Hi Paolo,

	On 2/10/07, Narvaez, Paolo (Paolo) <paolo@alcatel-lucent.com>
wrote:
	>
	> I have two general comments on this draft.
	>
	> 1. Section 7 assumes that ARP messages sent by the MS are
received by
	> the AR. The section states that ARP messages should be dropped
by the
	> AR. However, since ARP runs directly over Ethernet (there is
no IP
	> header) how can the 802.16 IPCS carry this type of packet over
the air?

	As mentioned the draft, ARP is not required for 802.16 because
of the fact
	that the MAC address is not required for identifying the
destination.
	There was a concern that an unmodified host may send ARP without
knowing
	that the underlying interface is 802.16, because of this I added
the
	above statement.

	If we think there is no such possibility, then I will remove
this text.

	>
	> 2. What is the subnet assignment? Can two MSs be on the same
subnet? Or
	> do we need to introduce some restrictions as in the
IPv6-over-802.16
	> draft.

	The draft assumes the p2p link, so no two MSs can be on the same
subnet.

	Thanks,
	Syam

	>
	> Regards,
	> Paolo
	>
	>
	>
	>
	> > -----Original Message-----
	> > From: Daniel Park [mailto:soohong.park@samsung.com]
	> > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 7:17 PM
	> > To: 16ng@ietf.org
	> > Subject: [16NG] Fw:
	> >
I-DACTION:draft-madanapalli-16ng-ipv4-over-802-dot-16-ipcs-00.txt
	> >
	> > IPv4CS document is now available at:
	> >
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-madanapalli-16ng-ipv
	> > 4-over-802-dot-16-ipcs-00.txt
	> >
	> > Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
	> > Mobile Convergence Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.
	> >
	> > _______________________________________________
	> > 16NG mailing list
	> > 16NG@ietf.org
	> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
	> >
	>
	> _______________________________________________
	> 16NG mailing list
	> 16NG@ietf.org
	> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
	>

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