Re: [Mip6] comments to boostrapping (split)

Hi Francis and Vijay
On 2005/12/01, at 23:51, Francis Dupont wrote:

>  In your previous mail you wrote:
>
>    Related question is how HA does HoA/IPsec garbage collection.
>
> => for IPsec it can be done by the peer dead detection and/or
> simply when the final IKE SA is closed. For the HoA I propose
> to follow the solution for DHCP and DNS. Note as the MN can't

OK, it's clear now.
So, HA must watch the IPsec status of a HoA which will now assigned  
to new MN.

> remove an RR when it has lost the connectivity a dynamic allocated
> HoA should not be assigned to another MN (there are enough of
> them :-).

To solve this issue, HA must wait for binding expiration at CN sides.
The time  will be the home registered binding's lifetime, because the  
binding lifetime for CN is
equal to or less than the binding lifetime at HA.

So, before assigning the HoA, HA must check
1. IPsec status check
2. No binding for HoA in BC.

Isn't it important to mention in the spec?

ryuji

>    Does the MN perform bootstrapping again?
>
> => yes at least for IPsec.
>
> Regards
>
> Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr
>
> PS: look at draft-ietf-dhc-dhcp-dns-12.txt (expired) for the  
> procedures
> to add and remove AAAA and PTR RRs. But as I've tried to explain
> from beginning, it is a question for IKE CFG stuff, *not* for MIPv6.
> For instance, MIPv6 should stay far from the DHCID thread
> (cf draft-ietf-dhc-ddns-resolution-10.txt).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mip6 mailing list
> Mip6@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6
>

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
Mip6@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6