[MEXT] One vs. Two BCEs per MN for PMIPv6-MIPv6 handovers

Hi all,

there has been little progress on the topic of interworking between MIPv6 and PMIPv6 recently. One reason is that the authors of draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions so far couldn't agree on the general approach to solve the interworking scenario, where the HA and LMA are co-located and the MN's mobility management scheme changes between PMIPv6 and MIPv6 during a session (i.e., MIPv6 HoA == PMIPv6 HoA). This scenario is called "scenario C" and is described in detail in draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions-02.

There are currently two approaches on the table to solve scenario C:

  1) One BCE per MN for PMIPv6-MIPv6 handovers (see draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions-02)

       BCE is equally shared by PMIPv6 and MIPv6, i.e., 
       MN and MAG change the same BCE. Neither of the
       mobility schemes is prioritized over the other.

  2) Two BCEs per MN for PMIPv6-MIPv6 handovers (see draft-tsirtsis-logically-separate-lmaha-00.txt)

       One BCE for PMIPv6 and one BCE for MIPv6. 
       The HA/LMA always prefers the MIPv6 BCE over the 
       PMIPv6 BCE for forwarding data packets, i.e., 
       PMIPv6 BCE is only used if the MIPv6 BCE is emtpy.

The current interactions draft draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions-02 assumes approach 1), whereas draft-tsirtsis-logically-separate-lmaha-00.txt proposes approach 2).

We would like to hear the WG's comments and opinions about both approaches. 

Thanks,

Kilian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of George Tsirtsis
> Sent: Dienstag, 25. März 2008 11:49
> To: Netlmm
> Cc: mext@ietf.org
> Subject: [MEXT] Fwd: 
> I-DAction:draft-tsirtsis-logically-separate-lmaha-00.txt
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Krishnan and I put together a draft describing what the expected
> behavior of a combined LMA/HA implementation should be. This should
> help the discussions around the so called scenario C of the PMIP-MIPv6
> interactions draft (draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions).
> 
> I hope you find the discussion in this draft useful.
> Please let us know if you have any comments/questions.
> 
> Regards
> George
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From:  <Internet-Drafts@ietf.org>
> Date: 2008/3/25
> Subject: I-D Action:draft-tsirtsis-logically-separate-lmaha-00.txt
> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line 
> Internet-Drafts directories.
> 
>         Title           : Behavior of Collocated HA/LMA
>         Author(s)       : G. Tsirtsis, S. Krishnan
>         Filename        : 
> draft-tsirtsis-logically-separate-lmaha-00.txt
>         Pages           : 9
>         Date            : 2008-03-25
> 
>  In discussions about PMIPv6-MIPv6 interactions in NETLMM WG, scenario
>  C describes the case of collocation of LMA and HA function.  In this
>  case a PMIP network emulates the "home link" for MNs using MIPv6.
>  This document argues that even when LMA and HA functions are
>  Collocated they MUST be treated as logically separate entities.  In
>  particular this draft argues that PMIP BCEs MUST NOT overwrite MIPv6
>  BCEs and vice versa.
> 
>  A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>  
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tsirtsis-logically-s
> eparate-lmaha-00.txt
> 
>  Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>  ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
>  Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
>  implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
>  Internet-Draft.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
>  I-D-Announce mailing list
>  I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>  Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>  or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> MEXT@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
> 
> 

Panasonic R&D Center Germany GmbH
63225 Langen, Hessen, Germany
Reg: AG Offenbach (Hessen) HRB 33974
Managing Director: Thomas Micke

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