90 likes | 226 Views
RFC 3775 bis. Julien Laganier, Marcelo Bagnulo MEXT WG chairs IETF-71 Philadelphia, PA, USA March 2008. Outline. Issue #1 Issue #2 Etc. #1 Last Accepted SQN. Allow HA or CN to tell MN last accepted SQN? New functionality out-of-scope for 3775bis. #2 Removing DHAAD. RFC 5026
E N D
RFC 3775 bis Julien Laganier, Marcelo Bagnulo MEXT WG chairs IETF-71 Philadelphia, PA, USA March 2008
Outline • Issue #1 • Issue #2 • Etc.
#1 Last Accepted SQN • Allow HA or CN to tell MN last accepted SQN? • New functionality out-of-scope for 3775bis
#2 Removing DHAAD • RFC 5026 • Mobile IPv6 Bootstrapping in Split Scenario • draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated • MIP6-bootstrapping for the Integrated Scenario • Remove DHAAD? • Change of functionality • out-of-scope for 3775bis • Document security considerations? • Some ISPs filter ICMPv6 • DHAAD is unauthenticated • Recommend to use bootstrapping procedures
#3 BRR, BErr sent by HA • Currently only CN can send BRR/BErr • Allow HA to send BRR/BErr? • Change of functionality • out-of-scope for 3775bis
#4 Remove site-local refs • RFC3879 • Deprecates site-local IPv6 addresses • RFC4193 • Defines unique-local IPv6 routable addresses • s/site-local/unique-local? • Not an extension • About consistency with other IETF specs in-of-scope for 3775bis
#6 Returning Home • RFC 3775 • Not clear whether MN returning home send a de-registration BU • SHOULD is used • Confusion for PMIPv6 – MIPv6 interactions doc • BU with home address set to CoA treated as a de-registration BU • Assume BU sent with HoA as source address is sent from the home link • DS-MIPv6 • BU sent with HoA as source address • IPv4 CoA option or outer IPv4 header carries actual CoA • Update RFC3775 to make it consistent with DS-MIPv6 behavior? in-of-scope for 3775bis
#7 MH Checksum Calculation • Next Header in pseudo-header set to 2 for checksum calculation • Should have been 135 (Mobility Header) • This is an interop issue that needs to be fixed • Update RFC3775 to fix next header value? in-of-scope for 3775bis
#8, 9… MISC • Minor issues we can discuss here: • Can the HA send a Binding Error message with status ‘1’ ever, or is it the CN only? • Clarify text in section 11.7.3 that describes MN behavior in response to binding ack with status 135 • Sending ICMP error to the MN in response to a BU sent from the home link • What is the HA response for a malformed or invalid mobility option? • ICMP parameter problem error needs to be sent – this is not specified • Relax the requirement to use a unicast address as the source address in DHAAD reply -- Anycast address can also be used as the source address • Does any of those of makes sense?