Re: [netext] PMIP purists - is PMIP-NEMO impossible? draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps

Hi Behcet,

See inline [SJ].

Regards,

Seil

-----Original Message-----
From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Behcet Sarikaya
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 7:48 PM
To: Alexandru Petrescu
Cc: netext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netext] PMIP purists - is PMIP-NEMO impossible?
draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps

Hi Alex,

Thanks for bringing this issue up :-).

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Alexandru Petrescu
<alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> NETEXT WG members,
>
> It was said at times that PMIP-NEMO is impossible.  PMIP is a core 
> network protocol, where mobility is supported without modifying the MN.
>
> Or, in some PMIP-NEMO proposals, the MN _is_ modified: for example it 
> adds DHCP Client on it; or other times it performs HNP Division.
>
> BEcause of this there exist statements that PMIP-NEMO is impossible.
>
> Do you think there are other reasons why PMIP-NEMO is impossible?
>

Basically, Nemo requires an MR. MR must be placed at the PMIP MN. This is
the fundamental problem. I don't think it is possible to make an MR without
changing MN. So far I have not seen any solutions.

[SJ] In my knowledge, an MN doesn't need to be changed if the MR acts as a
moving MAG, which has the responsibility of MN detection i.e. MN's attach
and detach, and sending/receiving PBU/PBA instead of the MN. Regarding on
this issue, it was described at the Paris meeting I remember.

You are talking about a protocol that is designed to not to modify MN.

> Do you think that running DHCP Client on MN is a modification to MN?
>

Standard clients are OK.

The problem with the WG draft is that it requires an DHCP client extended
with PD.

I would like draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-nemo-ps to be revised with a
discussion of this fundamental problem in PMIP-Nemo.

Regards,

Behcet
_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext