Re: [Mip4] RFC 5177 on Network Mobility (NEMO) Extensions for Mobile IPv4

George Tsirtsis wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> Any feedback is good.
> 
> - we should indeed sync up the docs a bit more now that one is
> stable. I will do that. - what new threats do you see with the new
> tunneling extension?

For example what happens if FA requests with the tunneling extension but
the MR prefers it not.

You don't see any threat with the tunneling extension?  MR-FA-HA is a
three-party communication and very much prone to risks.

> - not sure I see a reason to do more figures, but if you or someone 
> puts together some relevant figures I would be ok with including them
>  in the draft.

Thinking about this.  I think the doc has no other figure.  Section 3.1
is way too short and compressed.  When reading, I need to mentally 
picture those tunnels to understand it.  If I had figures in 3.1 my 
reading would be eased.  Maybe I'll provide some figures later.

Alex

> 
> Thanks George
> 
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Alexandru Petrescu 
> <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> George Tsirtsis wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Now that NEMOv4-base is outof the way, how about starting the
>>> process for
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mip4-nemov4-fa-02 ?
>>> 
>> Not sure whether you request procedural advancement or technical 
>> discussion.
>> 
>> Technically, I think there's need of some more syncing on FA-NEMO
docs, eg
>> citing numbers already allocated, ordering between different mobile
>> 
network
>> extensions, and maybe other things.  The Sec section could say how
new risks
>> are introduced by th etunnelling extension and how protection is
>> offered. 3.1 background could picture a figure or two of tunnels.
>> Just some thoughts...
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards George
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 12:47 AM,  <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC
>>>> libraries.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> RFC 5177
>>>> 
>>>> Title:      Network Mobility (NEMO) Extensions for Mobile IPv4 
>>>> Author:     K. Leung, G. Dommety, V. Narayanan, A. Petrescu 
>>>> Status:     Standards Track Date:       April 2008 Mailbox:
>>>> kleung@cisco.com, gdommety@cisco.com, vidyan@qualcomm.com, 
>>>> alexandru.petrescu@motorola.com Pages:      26 Characters:
>>>> 56094 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None
>>>> 
>>>> I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-mip4-nemo-v4-base-11.txt
>>>> 
>>>> URL:        http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5177.txt
>>>> 
>>>> This document describes a protocol for supporting Mobile
>>>> Networks between a Mobile Router and a Home Agent by extending
>>>> the Mobile IPv4 protocol.  A Mobile Router is responsible for
>>>> the mobility of one or more network segments or subnets moving
>>>> together.  The Mobile Router hides its mobility from the nodes
>>>> on the Mobile Network.  The nodes on the Mobile Network may be
>>>> fixed in relationship to the Mobile Router and may not have any
>>>> mobility function.
>>>> 
>>>> Extensions to Mobile IPv4 are introduced to support Mobile
>>>> Networks. [STANDARDS TRACK]
>>>> 
>>>> This document is a product of the Mobility for IPv4 Working
>>>> Group of
>> the IETF.
>>>> This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol.
>>>> 
>>>> STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards
>>>> track protocol for the Internet community,and requests
>>>> discussion and
>> suggestions
>>>> for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the
>>>> Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the
>>>> standardization state and status of this protocol.
>>>> Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
>>>> 
>>>> This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST
>>>> list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF
>>>> distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG.
>>>> Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST
>>>> distribution list should be sent to
>>>> RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.
>>>> 
>>>> Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by
>>>> sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the
>>>> message body
>>>> 
>>>> help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example:
>>>> 
>>>> To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs
>>>> 
>>>> help: ways_to_get_rfcs
>>>> 
>>>> Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either
>>>> the author of the RFC in question, or to
>>>> RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.
>> Unless
>>>> specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are
>>>> for unlimited distribution.
>>>> 
>>>> Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to 
>>>> RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.  Please consult RFC 2223,
>>>> Instructions to
>> RFC
>>>> Authors, for further information.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute
>>>> 
>>>> ...
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce
>>>> mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org 
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>  This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security
>> System. For more information please visit
>> http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________
-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/