RE: CGA-based HoA generation for MIP6 (was RE: [Mipshop] Review of draft-arkko-mipshop-cga-cba-04)

> Jari Arkko wrote: 
> 
> Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
> 
> >One question regarding CGA-based HoAs - don't we need to specify how 
> >CGA-based HoAs impact home registrations? For instance, the 
> preferred 
> >HoA bootstrapping mechanism today is using IKEv2. I'd 
> imagine that we 
> >will need to specify how a CGA-based HoA is generated after 
> MPD and how 
> >that binding is registered with the HA (i.e., does it need 
> to be signed?
> >Does the HA also need to know if the HoA has been generated using 
> >CGAs?).
> >  
> >
> Good question! I do not recall if this has been analyzed 
> during the design of cga-cba draft. But taking a look at 
> draft-ietf-mip6-ikev2-ipsec, it does allow the mobile node to 
> suggest what address to use. I'm not sure the draft says 
> anything about discovering the prefix first before suggesting 
> an address (which would be needed for CGAs), but this seems 
> in general possible in IKEv2. Vijay, are you listening?
> 

That is one part of the open question. The other part is to analyze
whether this has any implication for the home bindings itself - i.e., if
the HA knows that this is a CGA-based HoA and if it needs to be asserted
via a signature, etc. For the moment, I think I can look at it both ways
:) But, this needs to be thought through further. 

This would have significant implications to the cga-cba work, in the
sense that if we determine that home bindings will need to change, that
needs to be first standardized and then CGA-based RO can be built on top
of that. 

Vidya

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
Mipshop@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop