Re: [Mip4] Summing up: draft-ietf-mip4-mobike-connectivity-01.txt

Hans Sjostrand wrote:
> Pete and Vijay,
> 
> Some thoughts
> 
> 1. Access mode home seams to be forgotten.
> The answer there seams to be "Yes". Is the intention to pass WGLC 
> without taking home mode in consideration?

The home address has not been considered as an access
mode in any of the MIP4 VPN documents so far. We can
either continue not counting this as an access mode,
or add a new access mode to the draft.

3.1.1.  Access mode: 'h'

    This access mode is standard Mobile IPv4 [2] when the mobile node is
    attached to its home link.  The mobile node must detect that it is
    connected to home link before using this mode.

It seems unnecessary to me. Comments anyone else?

> 3. Dual tunnel a normative reference
> Vijay has proposed to make Dual tunnel a normative reference. I was sort 
> of hoping that the draft-ietf-mip4-mobike-connectivity could be made 
> self sufficient instead. But if it is the intention of the editors and 
> working group to push these as a bundle I'm not the person to question 
> that.

Yes, this is an issue. For now, I am hoping both
documents will advance as proposed standards. If ever
we need to make draft-ietf-mip4-mobike-connectivity
self contained, then we would have to add more text
on crossing security boundaries to the draft.

Vijay

-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/