Re: [MEXT] Subject: Multiple CoA draft 10 -- two proposals and some comments

Hi Christian,

Comment to one of your question.

Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tieto.com wrote:
> Draft 10, section 4.2 (and other places) defines the H flag, which when
> set means the mobile node wants to use both its home link and one or
> more of its foreign links.  The H flag is really an instruction to the
> home agent, that in addition to all the bidings currently defined
> is shall have an extra binding where packets shall not be tunneled.  
> 
> Proposal:  The mobile node should be able to define a binding saying
> 
>     HoA BID=0 HoA
> 
> This is a kind of default binding to be used when any of the other HoA-
> bindings cannot be used.  I think the H flag is an indirect way of
> saying there is an extra binding, whereas the binding above is direct.
> It also avoids continuously setting the H flag when both home link
> and foreign links are active.
[Ben] I cannot understand the reasoning for this.  Does not the use of
the H flag can achieve the same purpose as the 'default' binding as you
mention?  Is there some issue for the H flag to require this change you
are proposing?  Also, note that this draft underwent one IESG review and
changing a working mechanism now does not seem to garden any logic.

Regards,
Benjamin Lim

_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext