IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netlmm] Consensus call: RFC5107 based DHCP message intercept at MAG

Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> Tue, 14 April 2009 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6564728C12E for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bo6JfX-XDsMb for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F6428C1B9 for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.40,186,1238976000"; d="scan'208";a="171480237"
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Apr 2009 18:51:07 +0000
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com (sj-core-3.cisco.com [171.68.223.137]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n3EIp5Ub001783; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:51:05 -0700
Received: from sgundave-sb100.cisco.com (sgundave-sb100.cisco.com [128.107.163.1]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3EIp5Bp016609; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:51:05 GMT
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:51:05 -0700
From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Vijay Devarapalli <vijay@wichorus.com>
In-Reply-To: <49E4D052.80407@wichorus.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0904141149230.2863@sgundave-sb100.cisco.com>
References: <C608CD83.62CE%vijay@wichorus.com> <7973C9C7-DA7D-4D8B-B415-F45125D23DA0@gmail.com> <49E4D052.80407@wichorus.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1103; t=1239735065; x=1240599065; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; z=From:=20Sri=20Gundavelli=20<sgundave@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[netlmm]=20Consensus=20call=3A=20RFC510 7=20based=20DHCP=20message=20intercept=0A=20at=20MAG |Sender:=20; bh=hCoVBMCED4X5yfDhGGJIkzyJ3IomnRYsjIEsTkpODiU=; b=WJ7muFBItsEp6Tua/JY97/2qiAM9edHntWqPcAhqtA6vna4zhtnFx+MZGy xHbjvDfyZSsj3qnewl4LnTzK74CItn7JxIWqQx1N7V/40RS+UMLVejPQ59Nt AuezrFmweH;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=sgundave@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
Cc: netlmm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netlmm] Consensus call: RFC5107 based DHCP message intercept at MAG
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:49:56 -0000

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Vijay Devarapalli wrote:

> Hi Ryjji,
>
> Ryuji Wakikawa wrote:
>
>> >  In addition, you have the issue that Rajeev was brining up. Even in the 
>> >  DHCP
>> >  relay case, the client would now see different DHCP server IP address 
>> >  when
>> >  there is a MAG-MAG handover, if you force the MAG to be on the path for 
>> >  the
>> >  DHCP messages.
>>
>>  Why different DHCP server? The MAG-MAG handover is transparent to MN.
>>  DHCP client does not get any influence from the handover.
>>  I probably miss something here, can you explain this? Is this new issue?
>
> Sure. When the new MAG uses RFC 5107 to insert itself in the path for all 
> DHCP messages, the mobile node sees a different IP address for the DHCP 
> server. It earlier had the old MAG as the DHCP server because the old MAG had 
> also used RFC 5107 to appear as the DHCP server.
>


No. We already talked about this. The Def-Router address, the link-layer
address that the MN sees on any link is fixed. So, the MN will not see
the prev MAG in path, as you describe.

Sri

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email