[MEXT] Home-Agent-Switch-Message and Binding-Revocation-Indication-Message
<Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tieto.com> Tue, 23 December 2008 13:48 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 BD9BD3A689F;
Tue, 23 Dec 2008 05:48:11 -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 ABC0F3A689F
for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 05:48:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.307
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.307 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.292,
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 OaGcEkmaDo9y for <mext@core3.amsl.com>;
Tue, 23 Dec 2008 05:48:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tietoe03.tietoenator.com (datnt07.tieto.com [194.110.47.24])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B44DA3A687C
for <mext@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 05:48:08 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c26e2f18-0000151c00000510-be-4950ec4105a3
Received: from camaro.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.43]) by
tietoe03.tietoenator.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:48:49 +0200
Received: from corvette.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.143]) by
camaro.eu.tieto.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830);
Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:47:56 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:47:54 +0100
Message-ID: <D3CFEF84287B46408A7F0405EE7C5457019E82AF@corvette.eu.tieto.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Home-Agent-Switch-Message and
Binding-Revocation-Indication-Message
Thread-Index: AcllBQ4e4S/LZRz7RCOTXd8Ui3ClCg==
From: <Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tieto.com>
To: <mext@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2008 13:47:56.0775 (UTC)
FILETIME=[0F99CF70:01C96505]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: [MEXT] Home-Agent-Switch-Message and
Binding-Revocation-Indication-Message
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
Is there a difference to a mobile node receiving
an RFC 5142 specified
Home Agent Switch Message
# of addresses = 0
and receiving a draft-ietf-mext-binding-revocation specified
Binding Revocation Indication Message
The packets are different and the responses
will be different, but isn't it true the net result
in both cases is the same: the home agent will no
longer support the mobile node so the mobile node
is left alone in the world?
Christian
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
- [MEXT] Home-Agent-Switch-Message and Binding-Revo… Christian.Kaas-Petersen
- Re: [MEXT] Home-Agent-Switch-Message andBinding-R… Vijay Devarapalli