[Monami6] mcoas: combined solution

Nicolas Montavont <montavon@nist.gov> Fri, 22 July 2005 15:51 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvzoQ-0003tf-4k; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:51:46 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvzoP-0003tV-3Y for monami6@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:51:45 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27411 for <monami6@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:51:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rimp2.nist.gov ([129.6.16.227] helo=smtp.nist.gov) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dw0Id-0002jR-TV for monami6@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:23:02 -0400
Received: from [129.6.50.9] (scorpion.antd.nist.gov [129.6.50.9]) by smtp.nist.gov (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j6MFpcT8008755; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:51:38 -0400
Message-ID: <42E115A6.1000503@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:49:58 -0400
From: Nicolas Montavont <montavon@nist.gov>
User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050602)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Monami6 BOF proposal <monami6@ietf.org>, monami6@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NIST-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-NIST-MailScanner-From: montavon@nist.gov
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 50a516d93fd399dc60588708fd9a3002
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc:
Subject: [Monami6] mcoas: combined solution
X-BeenThere: monami6@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Monami6 BOF proposal <monami6@lists.ietf.org>
List-Id: Monami6 BOF proposal <monami6.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6>, <mailto:monami6-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/monami6>
List-Post: <mailto:monami6@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:monami6-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6>, <mailto:monami6-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: monami6-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: monami6-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Folks,

Given the last discussion we had on the mailing list, it seems that 
mcoas is a good candidate for a standard track. However, the idea of 
adding more options in the Binding Update (e.g. to specify a preference 
on the CoA) has emerged.

On the other side, documents related to flow redirection such as 
_draft-nomad-mip4-flow-mobility-pb-00.txt_  [TXT] 
<http://www.comnets.uni-bremen.de/%7Ekoo/draft-nomad-mip4-flow-mobility-pb-00.txt> 
, _draft-nomad-mobileip-filters_ [TXT] 
<http://www.comnets.uni-bremen.de/%7Ekoo/draft-nomad-mobileip-filters-05.txt>_, 
__draft-montavont-mobileip-ha-filtering_  [TXT] 
<http://clarinet.u-strasbg.fr/%7Emontavont/ietf/draft-montavont-mobileip-ha-filtering-v6-00.txt> 
and _draft-soliman-mobileip-flow-move-03_ [TXT] 
<http://standards.ericsson.net/karim/draft-soliman-mobileip-flow-move-03.txt>
propose  new options that allows the MN to specify which flow is 
concerned by a BU, and then to register different binding according to 
the flow type. These solutions allow to only redirect one flow from one 
address (and/or interface) to the other without modifying bindings of 
other flows.

At this point, one can think of a unique solution draft, which provides 
the description of all these options. It does not mean that in order to 
register multiple CoAs, the MN will have to send flow information, but 
that it will have the possibility to do so.

Having a solution draft merging all these documents would resolve lot of 
issues raised in draft-montavont-multihoming-pb-statement, such as:

    - 6.1.1 Path Selection (interface and CoA selection): the MN will be 
able to influence the CoA selection on a distant CN and indicate its 
policies.

    - 6.2.1 Binding Multiple CoAs to a given HoA: it will be possible to 
bind several CoAs to a given HoA, which will allow to keep backup CoAs 
(no preferences on CoAs) or to specify preferences with each CoA.

    - 7.3 Flow redirection: an accurate control of the flow redirection 
will be possible

The advantage of merging these documents will be to have a single 
document dealing with all issues related to multiple CoAs registration.

It would be nice if people can express their feeling about this.

Regards,

Nicolas

_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
Monami6@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6