IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com> Mon, 19 January 2009 13:45 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 E56AC28C1C9; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:45:59 -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 0152128C1C9 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:45:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.537
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 vRSuZU8rc3B4 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:45:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-2.servers.netregistry.net (smtp.netregistry.net [202.124.241.204]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 231983A67E5 for <mext@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:45:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [124.190.106.160] (helo=[192.168.0.187]) by smtp-2.servers.netregistry.net protocol: esmtpa (Exim 4.63 #1 (Debian)) id 1LOuRW-0005C3-C8; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:45:30 +1100
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:45:22 +1100
From: Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>
To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, sarikaya@ieee.org, vijay@wichorus.com, mext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <C59ACF22.B240%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Thread-Topic: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review
Thread-Index: Acl4Ng0X3joRG3lYgEOmRZ1GAGCiYgCA8M4AAACXDLY=
In-Reply-To: <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB7727E7640960@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
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?

=> You're asking the wrong person :) I never wanted this. I fully support
moving this out of the draft.

Hesham

> 
> (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