Re: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-05.txt
"Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com> Tue, 23 October 2012 15:31 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 488A821F86AF for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 UShC-ygFRZqK for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F5821F8672 for <netext@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4138; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1351006274; x=1352215874; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=lonxglUI0d/MYjo8cnZvorJTgMkMBaCGvST5uBj4Uc0=; b=bTVXUuEgaeu9wZWajH3F1YsQu8GZIhnPYJNOX/NwWhffub+jse4yrYZm WFQzrEScYZMfowU3qqD5ZyismVgZfx+wTIA5bkMBhmpe+iHBRA5r89Fnm uJiRsaP0bHqYiKxkOnesi4BWKj4w3rSbw9MXJSryR7lwTpfwOr9gTuRBf k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EAGi3hlCtJV2b/2dsb2JhbABEwWaBCIIgAQQBAQEPAVsLEgEIIkUGCyUCBA4FCAEZh1ADDwubeY9chl4NiVSKeGeFfmADiCWLd4JsihIDgyKBa4Jvghg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,635,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="134487740"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Oct 2012 15:31:14 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x12.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x12.cisco.com [173.36.12.86]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q9NFVDjP026169 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:31:13 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.204]) by xhc-aln-x12.cisco.com ([173.36.12.86]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:31:13 -0500
From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-05.txt
Thread-Index: AQHNsTNvcsHP4oRN/EKVold0XapWjQ==
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:31:13 +0000
Message-ID: <24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA80F56365B@xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <50864F3E.5000400@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
x-originating-ip: [10.32.246.210]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19298.000
x-tm-as-result: No--39.726000-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <3D3D821DB18A5649B984097BF49A42C3@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-05.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: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:31:15 -0000
Hi Alex, Thanks for reviewing the spec and appreciate your comments. Please see inline. On 10/23/12 1:03 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi, > >I noticed the addition of a new option to PBU: Delegated Mobile Network >Prefix Option. > >Arguably a new option in PBU may make sense if the existing RFC5213 Home >Network Prefix Option can not be reused to communicate this 'delegated' >prefix. HNP option is intended for MN-MAG link and while we need a prefix for delegation. Also quite a bit of LMA/MAG logic is tied to the existing HNP option. By separating the two we thought it will avoid any ambiguity and will easier for implementors to build this. > >But it has a GRE key in it... should we all implement it (even if set to >0)? If its set to 0, you can ignore it. Generally not needed when overlapping IP is not in use. > >Could the DMNP option be present in PBU and the HNP option absent? Yes. The HNP option is for the MR-MAG link. The prefix is hosted on that link. MR can continue to obtain IPv6 addresses from the HNP prefixes hosted by the MAG and it can obtain delegated prefixes from the DMNP option. > >Also I notice the addition of IPv4 (DMNP can be IPv4 or IPv6). Is there >a particular form of IPv4-in-IPv6 encapsulation that is preferred? Any standard encapsulation. GRE-IPv4, GRE-IPv6, IPv4-IPv4, IPv4-IPv6. Standard modes that we support in RFC5213 and RFC5844. This is a good comment. We will add few lines on the encapsulation modes. Regards Sri > On 10/23/12 1:03 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi, > >I noticed the addition of a new option to PBU: Delegated Mobile Network >Prefix Option. > >Arguably a new option in PBU may make sense if the existing RFC5213 Home >Network Prefix Option can not be reused to communicate this 'delegated' >prefix. > >But it has a GRE key in it... should we all implement it (even if set to >0)? > >Could the DMNP option be present in PBU and the HNP option absent? > >Also I notice the addition of IPv4 (DMNP can be IPv4 or IPv6). Is there >a particular form of IPv4-in-IPv6 encapsulation that is preferred? > >Alex > >Le 23/10/2012 01:13, internet-drafts@ietf.org a écrit : >> >> 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-05.txt Pages >> : 19 Date : 2012-10-22 >> >> 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-05 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-05 >> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ 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 >> >> > > >_______________________________________________ >netext mailing list >netext@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
- [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-05… internet-drafts
- Re: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmi… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmi… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)