Re: [Mip6] [Updated] DHCP Option for Home Information Discovery inMIPv6

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

Hi Vijay, 
  In the current NWG document only draft-jang-dhc-haopt-01.txt is referred and draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt is not. The latter draft requires DHCP server to provide the bootstrap info while as Alper said in WiMAX forum NWG's current draft, the info is provided by the AAA server to the DHCP relay and then all you need is draft-jang. It seems like NWG is introducing yet another method of bootstrapping and is not following your advise. 
Regards,

--behcet

----- Original Message ----
From: Vijay Devarapalli <[e-mail]>
To: Alper Yegin <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; Heejin Jang <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 1:42:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Mip6] [Updated] DHCP Option for Home Information Discovery inMIPv6

Alper Yegin wrote:

>>It'd only be a circular discussion if I had repeated the
>>
>>>reasons for not bundling a bunch of protocol extensions in a single
>>>document.
>>
>>let the MIP6 WG hear the arguments again, since we couldn't
>>reach a conclusion in the design team.
> 
> 
> You really want us to circle around, don't you :-)

well, now you want the MIP6 WG to adopt draft-jang as a WG document,
right? then you need to make a case for it.

>>>But I hope this data point helps: WiMAX Forum NWG architecture is using
>>>draft-jang.
>>
>>in what context and how are they planning to use it? 
> 
> 
> The MIP info is brought to the DHCP server via RADIUS and delivered to the
> MN via DHCP.

this is very bad. the draft that describes how to use DHCPv6 for MIP6
bootstrapping is draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt. 
not *any other* draft. WiMAX NWG needs to be told that. the following
figure in draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt very
important for someone to understand how to use DHCPv6 for MIP6
bootstrapping.

    The following diagram shows the network elements and layout in the
    integrated scenario:


                                       |
                   ASP(/MSP)           |   ASA/MSA(/MSP)
                                       |
                                       |
                   +-------+           |        +-------+
                   |       |           |        |       |
                   |AAAV   |-----------|--------|AAAH   |
                   |       |           |        |       |
                   |       |           |        |       |
                   +-------+           |        +-------+
                       |               |
                       |               |
                       |               |
                       |               |
                       |               |
                       |               |
                       |               |
                   +-----+    +------+ |
       +----+      |     |    |DHCP  | |
       | MN |------| NAS/|----|Server| |
       +----+      |Relay|    |      | |
                   +-----+    +------+ |
                                       |
                                       |
                   +--------+          |      +--------+
                   | HA     |          |      | HA     |
                   | in ASP |          |      |in MSP  |
                   +--------+          |      +--------+


>>the
>>WiMAX forum NWG can still use the DHCP options wherever
>>they are defined.
> 
> Yes. And WiMAX Forum could also use it even if IETF had concatenated all of
> the RFCs and I-Ds under a single document too.... This I-D being referenced
> whereas the draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt wasn't is a
> solid proof that the former I-D is useful without having to be integrated
> into the latter.

I am afraid the WiMAX NWG is referring to the wrong document. the
use of DHCPv6 for MIP6 bootstrapping is defined in
draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt.

>>>>the only other mechanism is to manually
>>>>configure the DHCP servers in the visited link with
>>>>information like home agent address, home address and home
>>>>prefix. this is a bad idea.
> 
> 
> You know that one does not have to put DHCP servers on every subnet, instead
> one can rely on DHCP relays. And that's the used technique for many
> enterprise networks. So, I don't see why this is a bad idea.

and DHCP relay messages cross firewalls and network boundaries?
come on...

Vijay

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6