Mobike Protocol Design draft-ietf-mobike-design-04.txt Tero Kivinen kivinen@safenet-inc

1. Mobike Protocol Design draft-ietf-mobike-design-04.txt Tero Kivinen kivinen@safenet-inc.com

2. Introduction & Terminology • I think the introduction is good enough, and do not require more work. • Do we need the terminology section at all? • Can we get rid of some terms? • Available addresses, locally operational address, path, primary path, preferred address, peer address set • Keep some terms? • Peer, operation address pair

3. Scenarios • The design draft lists to basic scenarios, where the protocols should work • I do not think we need more work on there, but in case we remove some terms there might be some changes needed here too.

4. Scope • This section might need more work, especially if we change the terminlogy. • No specific changes to this section yet.

5. Design Considerations • Some sections had quite big rewrite: • Choosing addresses • NAT Traversal • Some might still need some work • Return routability • IPsec Tunnel and Transport Mode • Should be ok: • Scope of SA changes • Zero address set functionality

6. Protocol Detail Issues • New or rewritten: • Updating address list • Path testing and window size • Should be ok: • Indicating support for mobike • Message presentation

7. Additional sections • Do we need more text about following issues (mostly removed in -04): • Simultaneous movement • Old sections rewritten to other sections: • Changing a preferred address and multi-homing support • Storing a single or multiple addresses • Indirect or Direct Indication • Connectivity Test using IKEv2 Dead-Peer Detection • Changing addresses or changing the paths • Add text about issue 71 probably in RR

8. Summary • Might still need some work (Terminology, scenarios, scope, and perhaps some new sections). • Most of the text should be ready. • Are we ready to WG LC now?