[netext] RE : Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03.txt

[BOC Michael <[e-mail]>]

Hey,

Ok, now I understand that this draft is about using DHCPv6-PD signalling messages to trigger a specific behavior of PMIPv6 and not at all about using DHCPv6 and its PD extension to provide MNPs to PMIPv6 and by extension to the MR.

Two (more) efficient solutions for this approach:
1) You don't need DHCPv6 entities (delegating router, DHCPv6 relay and so on). You just need to intercept DHCPv6-PD related messages and to enhances LMA to deliver prefixes shorter than 64 bits.
2) You deliver HNPs and MNPs (with prefixes shorter than 64 bits) for every nodes. This is a couple of lines to add in RFC5213.

Our approach can then be seen as one step further in integrating a real DHCPv6 architecture in parallel of PMIPv6 to deliver MNPs to mobile routers.

Michael

________________________________
De : [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
Date d'envoi : vendredi 20 juillet 2012 04:21
À : BOC Michael
Cc : [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Objet : 答复: Re: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03.txt


Hi,

The purpose of setting R flag is to indicate the network that network mobility service is allowed to the mobile node as specified in section 3.2. In this draft, it just focus on the way to assign the MNP to the MR based on DHCPv6-PD triggering mechanism.

Regarding the possible hints in IA_PD(s), I dont get your point very much. Could you explain more?

Best Regards,
Joy

[e-mail] 写于 2012-07-16 17:12:56:

> Hello all,
>
> Concerning this draft, I would like to know why you need to set the
> R flag in PBU
> (because you don't explain it in the draft) and if your approach is
> to not take
> into account possible hints in IA_PD(s). If this is the case, we
> just have to provide
> MNP(s) at MR attachment with the HNP(s) and we move on another subject.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Michael
>
>
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] De la
> > part de [e-mail]
> > Envoyé : lundi 16 juillet 2012 03:29
> > À : [e-mail]
> > Cc : [e-mail]
> > Objet : [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03.txt
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> > directories.
> >  This draft is a work item of the Network-Based Mobility Extensions
> > Working Group of the IETF.
> >
> >    Title           : Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6
> >    Author(s)       : Xingyue Zhou
> >                           Jouni Korhonen
> >                           Carl Williams
> >                           Sri Gundavelli
> >                           Carlos J. Bernardos
> >    Filename        : draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03.txt
> >    Pages           : 16
> >    Date            : 2012-07-15
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    Proxy Mobile IPv6 enables IP mobility for a host without requiring
> >    its participation in any mobility signaling, being the network
> >    responsible for managing IP mobility on behalf of the host.
> > However,
> >    Proxy Mobile IPv6 does not support assigning a prefix to a router
> > and
> >    managing its IP mobility.  This document specifies an extension to
> >    Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol for supporting network mobility using
> >    DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03
> >
> > A diff from previous version is available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03
> >
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netext mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>