IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

<Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> Mon, 19 January 2009 13:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: monami6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-monami6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39E23A6A48; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:32:57 -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 F084E28C137 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:32:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 OsUFKRghPBez for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:32:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-mx06.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.122.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0403A695B for <mext@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:32:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-mx06.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n0JDWDQs028425; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:32:25 +0200
Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.23]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:32:18 +0200
Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.22]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:32:08 +0200
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:32:03 +0200
Received: from NOK-AM1MHUB-05.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.9) by NOK-am1MHUB-02.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.291.1; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:32:02 +0100
Received: from NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.106]) by NOK-AM1MHUB-05.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.9]) with mapi; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:32:02 +0100
From: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com
To: hesham@elevatemobile.com, sarikaya@ieee.org, vijay@wichorus.com, mext@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:32:05 +0100
Thread-Topic: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review
Thread-Index: Acl4Ng0X3joRG3lYgEOmRZ1GAGCiYgCA8M4A
Message-ID: <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB7727E7640960@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <703169.3551.qm@web111408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <C59769DE.B1DA%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
In-Reply-To: <C59769DE.B1DA%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jan 2009 13:32:03.0424 (UTC) FILETIME=[50833E00:01C97A3A]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
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="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org

Hesham Soliman wrote:

> >> 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?
>
> => It was done for NETLMM. Technically and practically speaking it
> will never be used by the MN. And there is no reason for doing so.
> Whenever GRE is used it's used within the network not from the host.

If that's the case, why not specify it for PMIPv6 only?

(That would potentially simplify the specs -- you don't e.g. need to
think how "client MIPv6" IPsec (a messy area already) would work with
GRE. PMIPv6+IPsec is much simpler case, and might not need any new
text for GRE.)

Best regards,
Pasi
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email