IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Seamoby] CT Requirements Comments from IESG

Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1 <Madjid.Nakhjiri@motorola.com> Wed, 10 July 2002 19:10 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA16013 for <seamoby-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:10:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA00595; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:07:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA00564 for <seamoby@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:07:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from motgate3.mot.com (motgate3.mot.com [144.189.100.103]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA15796 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:06:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: [from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate3.mot.com (motgate3 2.1) with ESMTP id MAA25234 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 12:06:26 -0700 (MST)]
Received: [from il27exm07.cig.mot.com (IL27EXM07.cig.mot.com [136.182.15.116]) by pobox.mot.com (MOT-pobox 2.0) with ESMTP id MAA02686 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 12:07:21 -0700 (MST)]
Received: by IL27EXM07.cig.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.52) id <3FLZTMWZ>; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:07:21 -0500
Message-ID: <35DBB8B7AC89D4118E98009027B1009B08AD5555@IL27EXM10.cig.mot.com>
From: Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1 <Madjid.Nakhjiri@motorola.com>
To: 'Vijay Devarapalli' <vijayd@iprg.nokia.com>, James Kempf <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>
Cc: seamoby@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Seamoby] CT Requirements Comments from IESG
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:07:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.52)
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Context Transfer, Handoff Candidate Discovery, and Dormant Mode Host Alerting <seamoby.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: seamoby@ietf.org


hi Jim,

James Kempf wrote:

> 2) The requirements say nothing about context which must be modified on
the new router in order to be useful. An example is ROHC
> context when the mobile obtains a new care of address. How would the CT
protocol handle this?

the context transfer protocol should not worry about this at all.
it is specific to each feature. for ROHC, the IP addresses have
to be changed. for IPsec Security Associations, the SPIs maybe
need to be changed in addition to the IP addresses.

Madjid>> I agree with both Charlie and Vijay. Also we are getting
into solution space when asking this sort of questions. Our proposal
(TEXT) which is based on BETH idea, deals with Rohc context very nicely.

Madjid


_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status