RE: [Monami6] Accept draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa-04.txtasMonami6 WG Document

["KLAMM Frederic RD-CORE-CAE" <[e-mail]>]

Wasn't this already true for case 2 ? 

Regards

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Vincent Jardin [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Envoyé : lundi 10 avril 2006 14:22
> À : Monami6 WG
> Objet : Re: [Monami6] Accept 
> draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa-04.txtasMonami6 WG Document
> 
> Hi,
> 
> When you have many addresses (prefixes) on the same 
> interface, you need to define an heuristic to select the 
> source address of the packets.
> 
> Regards,
>    Vincent
> 
> KLAMM Frederic RD-CORE-CAE wrote:
> > Hi Ryuji,
> > I understand that having only one CoA per interface is an 
> implementation choice, and that the MCoA draft is to allow 
> several CoA per interface.
> > Therefore, wouldn't it be worth enlarging formally the 
> scope of the spec by adding in 5.1 :
> >  
> > "  There are two cases when a mobile node has several 
> Care-of Addresses:
> > 
> >    1.  A mobile node uses several physical network interfaces and
> >        acquires a Care-of Address on each of its interfaces.
> > 
> >    2.  A mobile node uses a single physical network interface, but
> >        multiple prefixes are announced on the link the interface is
> >        attached to.  Several global addresses are configured on this
> >        interface for each of the announced prefixes.	"
> > 
> > A third case, combination of the 2 previous cases, something like :
> >    
> >    3.  A mobile node uses several physical network interfaces and 
> > 	several global adresses are configured on at least one 
> of these interfaces.	"
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> >>-----Message d'origine-----
> >>De : [e-mail]
> >>[mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de Nicolas Montavont 
> >>Envoyé : lundi 31 octobre 2005 17:54 À : Ryuji Wakikawa Cc 
> : Monami6 
> >>WG Objet : Re: [Monami6] Accept 
> >>draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa-04.txtas Monami6 WG Document
> >>
> >>Ryuji,
> >>
> >>On 31 oct. 05, at 16:08, Ryuji Wakikawa wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hi NIcolas
> >>>
> >>>On 2005/10/31, at 19:15, Nicolas Montavont wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi Ryuji,
> >>>>
> >>>>...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>3. I dont understand the need for a BID. the draft says
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>         The BID is an identification number used to 
> distinguish
> >>>>>>>         multiple bindings registered by the mobile node.   
> >>>>>>>Assignment of
> >>>>>>>         distinct BID allows a mobile node to register
> >>
> >>multiple
> >>
> >>>>>>>binding
> >>>>>>>         cache entries for a given home address.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>doesnt the HoA/CoA pair uniquely identify a binding?
> >>>>>>do you want a unique identifier for a particular 
> binding even when 
> >>>>>>the CoA changes? in that case why not associate the 
> interface with 
> >>>>>>a particular binding?
> >>>>>>maybe I am missing something.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>How do you express interface in MIP6 stack? Do you 
> suggest the use 
> >>>>>of name like "en0"?:-) BID can be an interface index 
> which most of
> >>
> >>implementation uses for
> >>
> >>>>>interface management.  That's why we use 16bits length for BID. 
> >>>>>(interface index is mostly 16bits)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>In our system, we bind BID with network interface. We define 
> >>>>>well-known BID which express intereface like wifi,
> >>
> >>ethernet, Ev-Do,
> >>
> >>>>>etc. (This is not in the draft though).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I am not sure I follow you here. Do you mean that you consider to 
> >>>>have only one binding HoA/CoA per interface?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Do you consider the case when multiple CoAs are assigned to an 
> >>>interface?
> >>>Sure. That's possible with the current MCOA draft.
> >>
> >>Yes, that's what I meant.
> >>
> >>
> >>>The above example is just example of our system.
> >>>In our system, the interface only has one CoA per interface.
> >>
> >>Ok if it's an implementation choice.
> >>However, I think we should allow several CoAs per interface in the 
> >>spec.
> >>
> >>Nicolas
> >>
> >>
> >>>ryuji
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>Nicolas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>ryuji
> >>>>>
> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>Monami6 mailing list
> >>>>>[e-mail]
> >>>>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Monami6 mailing list
> >>[e-mail]
> >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Monami6 mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Monami6 mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
> 

_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6