IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MEXT] Draft binding-revocation-12 "mobile node operation"

Behcet Sarikaya <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com> Fri, 18 September 2009 15:14 UTC

Return-Path: <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E21F3A6937 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.892
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.892 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.372, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EmMjYE5ri2FD for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web111410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (web111410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [67.195.15.186]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 299403A6826 for <mext@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 60595 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Sep 2009 15:14:58 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1253286898; bh=WGfNqTvQJ+ep/+gl+Ts2VgwL2cOVasvC4tmi6a55+RE=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dbN2WyroiZ1rB+4CLD9lVC471BZjckUWkwIyzmrs3Neh5tgMQn+PluMsL9+4EcUXFfSq8s9OtPQ7N3WosDXiuCq+nWfd7qeejP3WGuwiUC0C+Vz01WVbDSbA/otxtCr7LCK1KFmFbV03VBSPfapb6VLAHHekRDWAntuB+Tj4miM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=MzJ0O5DBf3A20yDir7qui/kKXsdm2cqVrjbLPcjDpYHr29oIiju9cuseclZIk8DctyWB3A0iIlS6dkQbqsXLXkmDaM2q1UgEKUtKCErrLtLUUzlpSK+RG4/AYCe9zGi1YnuwD2vqnwnUHTLBH4IUFnJ87nTJ1r05mGeXL/bR1xY=;
Message-ID: <522210.56813.qm@web111410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
X-YMail-OSG: Weye8iIVM1mjZRHYrFjjRN9b7GX8ebjNod.r4ltx508T1WXGUTkjAnqFSWrTHo45xCHKPyPjdQNePr_TiWydWXSHwpHav95DxM48o4j2nZLqT8qudJsyjMI5LqPHfuLOgjPucKf9cs5mOjfm40mwr80c2dmfCAOuYSLGTFgSZKiTHc.azwKnJM0UEcIO4T4_YIH7di0BQgdDpHqLmMS_5e6qjqZ431ZHCTAQMjV3O2ZZmqanEyeT9m3g5anXYUs6FXtlfdxNqvlNo2ViO.GqhCd.MO7Fw2RAOFVSJnhCeHGcd2rsl61GAZ9rdNu.
Received: from [206.16.17.212] by web111410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:14:58 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/157.18 YahooMailWebService/0.7.347.2
References: <C24C03AE7348E44FB76B34B5D4ED44F503AB2BE3@esealmw106.eemea.ericsson.se> <C5A96676FCD00745B64AE42D5FCC9B6E204B8880@zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:14:58 -0700
From: Behcet Sarikaya <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com>
To: Ahmad Muhanna <amuhanna@nortel.com>, Yuri Ismailov <yuri.ismailov@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <C5A96676FCD00745B64AE42D5FCC9B6E204B8880@zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1359222588-1253286898=:56813"
Cc: mext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MEXT] Draft binding-revocation-12 "mobile node operation"
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:14:07 -0000

Hi Ahmad,
  There is already a draft related to flow revocation.

Regards,

Behcet


>
>From: Ahmad Muhanna <amuhanna@nortel.com>
>To: Yuri Ismailov <yuri.ismailov@ericsson.com>
>Cc: mext@ietf.org
>Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:44:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [MEXT] Draft binding-revocation-12 "mobile node operation"
>
>
>Yuri,
> 
>What you are talking about is related to flow revocation 
>and I believe the chairs mentioned earlier that need to be addressed later on . 
>possibly as an extension to this specification.
>Regards, 
>Ahmad 
> 
>
>
________________________________
 From: Yuri Ismailov 
>>  [mailto:yuri.ismailov@ericsson.com] 
>>Sent: Thursday, September 17, 
>>  2009 10:28 AM
>>To: Muhanna, Ahmad (RICH1:2H10)
>>Cc: >>  mext@ietf.org
>>Subject: Draft binding-revocation-12 "mobile node 
>>  operation"
>>
>>
>>Ahmad,
>> 
>>I think that 
>>  "mobile node operation" chapter in the draft requires some extension, which 
>>  would explicitely state one or more possible actions of the MN after sending 
>>  BRA.
>>In the case if NOT 
>>  all bindings were revoked an MN still has an option to transfer flows to 
>>  the remaining, still "active" bindings, However, if all bindings were revoked, 
>>  then,
>>according to my 
>>  understanding, after a BRA sent by an MN, the MN will end up in 
>>  the state when it cannot send or recieve traffic due to the revoked 
>>  bindings. Transition into this state is actually triggered by HA or LMA 
>>  by sending BRI. What is the way out of this state?
>>I did not find any 
>>  hints about that in the document. I think that this is important to specify 
>>  MN's actions when it ends up in such state.
>> 
>>Does that sound 
>>  reasonable?
>> 
>>Regards
>>Yuri
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email