Re: [netext] Access Network Information option for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> Thu, 14 July 2011 06:37 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4438E21F8829 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:37:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.583
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.984, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O5+PfnZ2gS7s for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2B321F881C for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:37:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=2265; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1310625425; x=1311835025; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E2Dlq9aGokqF112DxVROhz6Cv/jT/hfpuUDq27F1UHM=; b=HrWG/hZURyddw6Kjnu2pbGDkSfAmlgSBa3Dq6F4Xegv1Hb8rLoQKLxtd weNATilSn/gee3WEg9iPt1+rmtU6uKDzZfkyiycKmSM/gm0gW0XX3ab9w PQ2ueeXyNuiaG+zhOD+YHqZ1e1SwzlnFJdifaSLaqIVSCGtGFcjkENxTN w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAO2NHk6rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABTp1F3iHqid54khjoEh1OLEYUJhFOHFA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,527,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="2807608"
Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jul 2011 06:37:04 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6E6b3Cp021573; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 06:37:04 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:37:03 -0700
Received: from 10.32.243.103 ([10.32.243.103]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 06:37:02 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:37:01 -0700
From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Ryuji Wakikawa <ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA43DC9D.20EC7%sgundave@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Access Network Information option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
Thread-Index: AcxB8G/ErmvyAQkVvkaJDfgZQT6J2Q==
In-Reply-To: <305A8322-8E92-41CD-A71A-47B8F6021B0A@gmail.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2011 06:37:03.0774 (UTC) FILETIME=[716BABE0:01CC41F0]
Cc: netext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netext] Access Network Information option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " <netext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext>
List-Post: <mailto:netext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 06:37:08 -0000

Hi Ryuji,

Thanks for the quick review. Appreciate it.

Yes, static keying of the information is always an option. But, that will be
a provisioning nightmare and secondly the information may be multi-valued
for a given MAG ID and may not be 1:1. We fundamentally need a container for
carrying access network information, that may be specific to the SSID,
Operator Id ... of the AP ..., having this generic container will greatly
help deployments. In one of our deployments, we have a requirement to carry
the Geo-location of one of the AP's out of the several attached to the MAG.
Hence, we need this simple option.

I will make the below suggested changes.

Regards
Sri





On 7/13/11 4:23 PM, "Ryuji Wakikawa" <ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sri
> 
> I reviewed this document.
> 
> Why do you exchange this static information dynamically?
> If MAG and LMA are located in the Proxy Mobile IPv6 Domain,
> can't LMA know the access network information from the MAG's IP address?!
> 
> The spec. is very simple and straightforward.
> There are minor comments.
> 
> - better to define the access network information in 2.2?
> - In section3, 
> "in  DHCP option (82), which is the DHCP Relay Agent Information option
> [RFC3046]."
> "in  DHCP option (code: 82), which is the DHCP Relay Agent Information option
> [RFC3046]."
> - In section4,
> "Realm names are required to be unique, and are piggybacked on the
> administration of the DNS  namespace."
> What does the latter sentence mean, "piggybacked on the administration of the
> DNS  namespace"? 
> - In section 5, 
> "creates a two new name spaces" -> "creates two new name spaces"
> 
> regards,
> ryuji
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2011/07/13, at 14:33, Sri Gundavelli wrote:
> 
>> Please comment on the draft related to carrying Access Network Information
>> to the LMA.
>> 
>> 
>> 7. Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6   10 Mins
>>   I-D: 
>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt
>>   Presenter: Jouni Korhonen
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> netext mailing list
>> netext@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>