[Mobopts] About draft-weniger-mobopts-mip6-cnlocpriv

<jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com> Wed, 25 July 2007 19:19 UTC

Return-path: <mobopts-bounces@irtf.org>
Received: from [] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IDmOP-0005Lm-5A; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:19:29 -0400
Received: from [] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IDmOO-0005Lh-Cl for mobopts@irtf.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:19:28 -0400
Received: from sehan001bb.han.telia.se ([]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IDmOM-0002La-Uh for mobopts@irtf.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:19:28 -0400
Received: from SEHAN021MB.tcad.telia.se ([]) by sehan001bb.han.telia.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:19:19 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:19:17 +0200
Message-ID: <59D7431DE2527D4CB0F1EFEDA5683ED301F27330@SEHAN021MB.tcad.telia.se>
Thread-Topic: About draft-weniger-mobopts-mip6-cnlocpriv
Thread-Index: AcfO8LHeHi9zbBq7Q2Wl9glwlUq7fw==
From: jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com
To: Kilian.Weniger@eu.panasonic.com, mobopts@irtf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Jul 2007 19:19:19.0522 (UTC) FILETIME=[B3137C20:01C7CEF0]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228
Subject: [Mobopts] About draft-weniger-mobopts-mip6-cnlocpriv
X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobility Optimizations <mobopts.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts>, <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mobopts@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts>, <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: mobopts-bounces@irtf.org

Hi Kilian,

I think it would be useful to add some text and discuss a bit of the
issues related to the assumptions that the I-D makes regarding the
discovery of an optimal HA / MSP for a given CN / CN domain.

Mainly because.. It was stated during the prez that a visited MSP domain
and a CN domain does not need to have any relation with each other. I
like to understand how a MN can figure out reliably, even to some
that the visited MSP and the CN domain are topologically close to 
each other. The MN cannot trust much to prefix information (e.g. if CNs
use PI blocks) and the MN cannot trust much to DNS (as operators or
providers do play a lot with DNS). As stated during the prez the
situation gets even trickier when the CN is also mobile. Do you have
any reliable methods in mind that could be used to verify the close
proximity of the MSP and the CN?

I also highly doubt that an operator who has nothing to do with a CN
domain would populate its DNS with any information that would allow
finding the closest HA to the said CN domain. And wise versa a CN
domain populating DNS with information of random MSPs is imho at least

The situation is of course different if the MSP and the CN domain are
'the same domain', which is a typical local HA allocation case..


Mobopts mailing list