IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review

<pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com> Mon, 19 January 2009 10:22 UTC

Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: mip6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-mip6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76D63A6A30; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 02:22:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86843A677C for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 02:22:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OPZTUMeI9bZ2 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 02:22:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE9823A6A30 for <mext@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 02:22:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ftrdmel1.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.152]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:22:06 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:22:05 +0100
Message-ID: <DD8B8FEBBFAF9E488F63FF0F1A69EDD10570B9D6@ftrdmel1>
In-Reply-To: <703169.3551.qm@web111408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review
Thread-Index: Acl3/77zu7VjWC1CTb+8rnGTNkg+XQCHLB9A
References: <C596274D.B18A%hesham@elevatemobile.com> <703169.3551.qm@web111408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
From: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com
To: sarikaya@ieee.org, hesham@elevatemobile.com, vijay@wichorus.com, Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, mext@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jan 2009 10:22:06.0618 (UTC) FILETIME=[C77CA7A0:01C97A1F]
Cc: jari.arkko@piuha.net
Subject: Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org


Hi Behcet,

If relevant in MIP context: there is a proposal to use GRE key as a tunnel identifier to solve the tunnel loop issue (IETF73/ intarea open meeting/presentation of draft-ng-intarea-tunnel-loop-00).

Regards,
Pierrick
________________________________________
De : mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Behcet Sarikaya
Envoyé : vendredi 16 janvier 2009 18:27
À : Hesham Soliman; Vijay Devarapalli; Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com; mext@ietf.org
Cc : Jari Arkko
Objet : Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review



________________________________________
From: Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>
To: Vijay Devarapalli <vijay@wichorus.com>; Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com; mext@ietf.org
Cc: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 7:00:13 PM
Subject: Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review


> Hi Pasi, Hesham,
> 
> The TLV header was specified in the DS-MIPv6 document after rather a
> long and acrimonious debate on the former MIP6 mailing list. There were
> atleast two consensus calls that were run at that time.

=> I don't realy want to get into that, we all know there was no concensus
and we had to teleconference to come up with the existing method

Anytime you have
> a UDP header with IPv4/IPv6/GRE header following it, you need the TLV
> header. 
 
At that time, there were folks arguing for using GRE
> encapsulation with MIPv6 also. 
[behcet] I couldn't understand why MN would need to support GRE. Can someone explain the use case?
 

Thanks,
 
Behcet
 

_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email