Re: [MEXT] Comments on draft-ietf-mext-binding-revocation-02

["Stupar, Patrick" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ahmad,

Please see below.

Best Regards,

Patrick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ahmad Muhanna [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 7:51 PM
> To: Stupar, Patrick
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: Comments on draft-ietf-mext-binding-revocation-02
> 
> Hi Patrick,
> Thanks. One slight modification below.
> 
> Regards,
> Ahmad
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stupar, Patrick [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 11:18 AM
> > To: Muhanna, Ahmad (RICH1:2H10)
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: RE: Comments on draft-ietf-mext-binding-revocation-02
> > >
> > > [Ahmad]
> > > I see what you are saying. I assumed that this is in the
> > form of NAI.
> > > we
> > > can add some text to clarify that, would that address your
> > concern or
> > > you have in mind a possible different format?
> >
> > I think this would be good. Either a definition in section
> > 2.2 or a clarification in the text would be fine with me.
> 
> [Ahmad]
> Sure.
> 
> 
> > >
> > > [Ahmad]
> > > Currently, neither the HoA nor the CoA is included in the
> > BRI message.
> > > Are you suggesting that we add those options as valid ones
> > in the BRI?
> >
> > No I am not. What I meant here is that HoA is in the routing
> > header of the packet containing the BRI. Checking of HoA
> > would be enough IMO. It could be moved to the previous bullet
> > of the list as in the following proposed text:
> > OLD TEXT:
> > "
> >    o  The mobile node MUST verify that the IP address in the type 2
> >       routing header is its Home Address.
> >
> >    o  If the Acknowledgement (A) bit is set in the Binding
Revocation
> >       Indication and the MN has the BCE in registered state,
> > the mobile
> >       node MUST send a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement.
> > However, in
> >       all other cases when the (A) bit is set in the BRI, the mobile
> >       node SHOULD send a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement.  In all
> >       cases, the mobile node MUST follow Section 11.2 when send a
BRA
> >       using the appropriate status code.
> > "
> > NEW TEXT
> > "
> >    o  The mobile node MUST verify that the IP address in the type 2
> >       routing header is its Home Address and that its Binding Update
> > 	List contains an entry for that Home Address. If one of
> > the tests fails,
> > 	the mobile node SHOULD silently discard the received BRI
> >       message.
> >
> >    o  If the Acknowledgement (A) bit is set in the Binding
Revocation
> >       Indication, the mobile
> >       node MUST send a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement.
> > However, in
> >       all other cases when the (A) bit is set in the BRI, the mobile
> >       node SHOULD send a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement.  In all
> >       cases, the mobile node MUST follow Section 11.2 when send a
BRA
> >       using the appropriate status code.
> > "
> 
> [Ahmad]
> I am not sure I follow the second bullet of the "NEW TEXT". What about
> the following modified text:
> 
> "MODIFIED TEXT"
> 
>    o  The mobile node MUST verify that the IP address in the type 2
>       routing header is its Home Address and that its Binding Update
> 	List contains an entry for that Home Address. If one of the
> tests,
> 	fails the mobile node SHOULD silently discard the received BRI
>       message.
> 
>    o  If the Acknowledgement (A) bit is set in the Binding Revocation
>       Indication and its Binding Update List contains an entry for the
>       IP address in the type 2 routing header, the mobile node MUST
>       send a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement.  However, in
>       all other cases when the (A) bit is set in the BRI, the mobile
>       node SHOULD send a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement.  In all
>       cases, the mobile node MUST follow Section 11.2 when send a BRA
>       using the appropriate status code.
> 
[Patrick]
The actions in the first bullet apply to any received BRI (also to those
with the A bit set). Having said that, in the second bullet it is only
required  to specify the additional operation (i.e. sending a BRA) the
MN has to perform when the A bit is set. IMO the text you added is
redundant and not required. Do you have some particular scenario I am
missing?  



> >
> > Please note that the proposed text overlaps with the last
> > bullet listed in section 11.2. I would remove that as in the
> > following:
> >
> > Old text:
> > "11.2.  Sending Binding Revocation Acknowledgement
> >
> >    When the mobile node receive a valid Binding Revocation
Indication
> >    with the (A) bit is set from its home agent and while
> > having this BCE
> >    in registered state, the mobile node MUST send a packet to its
> home
> >    agent containing a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement according
to
> >    the procedure in Section 7.1 and the following:
> >
> >    o  The mobile node MUST set the status field to successful
> > to reflect
> >       that it has received the Binding Revocation Indication and
> >       acknowledge that its IP connectivity with its home
> > agent has been
> >       revoked.
> >
> >    o  The destination IP address of the IPv6 packet of the Binding
> >       Revocation Acknowledgement is set to the source IP
> > address of the
> >       received IPv6 packet of the Binding Revocation Indication.
The
> >       Mobile Node MUST include its home address in the Home Address
> >       option in the Destination Option.
> >
> >    o  If the mobile node receives a Binding Revocation
> > Indication from a
> >       home agent which the mobile node does not have a registered
> >       binding with, the mobile node SHOULD silently discard the BRI
> >       message.  The mobile node should continue to use its
> > assigned HoA
> >       to access its IP mobility service."
> >
> > New text:
> > "11.2.  Sending Binding Revocation Acknowledgement
> >
> >    When the mobile node receive a valid Binding Revocation
Indication
> >    with the (A) bit is set from its home agent and while
> > having this BCE
> >    in registered state, the mobile node MUST send a packet to its
> home
> >    agent containing a Binding Revocation Acknowledgement according
to
> >    the procedure in Section 7.1 and the following:
> >
> >    o  The mobile node MUST set the status field to successful
> > to reflect
> >       that it has received the Binding Revocation Indication and
> >       acknowledge that its IP connectivity with its home
> > agent has been
> >       revoked.
> >
> >    o  The destination IP address of the IPv6 packet of the Binding
> >       Revocation Acknowledgement is set to the source IP
> > address of the
> >       received IPv6 packet of the Binding Revocation Indication.
The
> >       Mobile Node MUST include its home address in the Home Address
> >       option in the Destination Option."
> 
> [Ahmad]
> Sure. That is fair and good.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Ahmad
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext