Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip6-06
Basavaraj Patil <bpatil1@gmail.com> Wed, 22 May 2013 19:49 UTC
Return-Path: <bpatil1@gmail.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 EE92B21F96C0 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 W2cuHtvWaI1m for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-f52.google.com (mail-oa0-f52.google.com [209.85.219.52]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6CE821F96BE for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h1so3245330oag.39 for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4W0YFvdF1fdfRhhoNwXYHJ8Ilxxb00IywOEuemTjiQ4=; b=nakqz1R/IkggY1jwqxPfziTS1aRfku94Jfcgj99CR8linys1IJFVIgsbQbKa/Auy0o tZWw3lEWA819A7nJTUn+ruEKRHl4YlXWkHeQHQoJUzEjSezsQGEqnBgik2vQldwkQYXr urf4zfuANexDVMDLY24Cs0HsOzsd7URdhnSCwhqvrqSnlsxOxe9tl70D2s5PSQaaLy6X mJ3uUGmmP8/YiKu+ipxz4lmqZqC3druXXdgJoiO4EwVftAlpVRi2GRY0Y1sAKZyVghCl LqdA2EmdPU5Qz9Y+2MXq+YcaZ95+WINx+ZRsCkzpyzc6yBpkgYRBCJ2qSCazqh1DtByI OF8A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.237.77 with SMTP id va13mr6157464obc.65.1369252140971; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:49:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.103.235 with HTTP; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:49:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8102A40D0@xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com>
References: <1369062263.4503.40.camel@acorde.it.uc3m.es> <24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8102A40D0@xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 14:49:00 -0500
Message-ID: <CAA5F1T3fi=nbUdE6pgw00QVfHGZEcMBm-opoLWWEf+HPKJimfw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Basavaraj Patil <bpatil1@gmail.com>
To: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8ff1cdcc78cbd404dd53db2e"
Cc: "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip6-06
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: Wed, 22 May 2013 19:49:10 -0000
Inline: On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) < sgundave@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Raj, > > > Adding to what carlos said. Just one clarification. > > > > On 5/20/13 8:04 AM, "Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano" <cjbc@it.uc3m.es> wrote: > > > > >> 5. In Sec 4.4.1, step 4: > >> "If the mobile access > >> gateway does not know the delegated prefix(es), then the > >> delegated mobile network prefix in the DMNP option(s) MUST be > >> set to the unspecified IPv6 address "::", " > >> > >> > >> How would the MAG know the delegated prefix(es)? Unless it is > >> just renewing the assigned prefix(es)? > > > The prefixes can be statically configured in the policy profile. Typically > mobile networks are statically configured (but registered with the LMA) as > we don't want the prefixes to disappear if the egress link goes down and > that will result in local communication between the hosts to break. So, > the prefixes are statically provisioned in the mobile network. But, > mobility support comes up only when there is active session with LMA > enabling the forwarding. > > If the MAG knows the prefixes, it can indicate them in the DMNP option. > If the MAG does not know the prefixes, it will carry a NULL value. > LMA assigns them based on what is in the BCE state. > > This is consistent with how the home address (IPv4 HoA, HNP) options are > carried in PMIP signaling messages. > > Raj> What does this mean: "Typically mobile networks are statically configured (but registered with the LMA)...."? Also: "So, the prefixes are statically provisioned in the mobile network." Would be good if you can clarify since you have a view or interpretation that I am not sure everyone is in sync with. -Raj > > Regards > Sri > > >
- [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip… Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… zhou.xingyue
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [netext] Review of I-D: draft-ietf-netext-pd-… Basavaraj Patil