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

zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn Fri, 20 July 2012 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn>
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 99C4311E8072; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -96.993
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.993 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6grT0TmfbnbS; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:20:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93A5511E80BE; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 107235771751954; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:12:20 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.30.3.21] by [192.168.168.16] with StormMail ESMTP id 28955.6127390430; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:21:20 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse02.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id q6K2LPGG004023; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:21:25 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn)
In-Reply-To: <94D2EEADE1F74740979E8041CBA339380355A4EB@EXDAG0-B3.intra.cea.fr>
To: BOC Michael <michael.boc@cea.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: 483CD781:DF06E9B0-48257A41:000AE6D9; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007
Message-ID: <OF483CD781.DF06E9B0-ON48257A41.000AE6D9-48257A41.000CEE45@zte.com.cn>
From: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:21:13 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2012-07-20 10:21:26, Serialize complete at 2012-07-20 10:21:26
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 000CEE4548257A41_="
X-MAIL: mse02.zte.com.cn q6K2LPGG004023
Cc: "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>, netext-bounces@ietf.org, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" <internet-drafts@ietf.org>, "i-d-announce@ietf.org" <i-d-announce@ietf.org>
Subject: [netext] 答复: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-03.txt
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: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 02:20:47 -0000

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

netext-bounces@ietf.org 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 : netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] De la
> > part de internet-drafts@ietf.org
> > Envoyé : lundi 16 juillet 2012 03:29
> > À : i-d-announce@ietf.org
> > Cc : netext@ietf.org
> > 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
> > netext@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
>