Subject: [Mip6] Comments on draft-ietf-mip6-ikev2-ipsec-01

From: Gerardo Giaretta <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:12:16 +0200

Hi Vijay,

I have some comments on draft-ietf-mip6-ikev2-ipsec-01.

Overall, the draft looks good. In my opinion, the unique general issue
is that it is tied very much to rfc 3776 and as a result it is not
self-contained. I mean that it is not possible to read the draft without
having also rfc3776 in front of you. This is ok to me, but I wonder if
it is acceptable in general.

Some more detailed comments:

- section 3.2: I don't understand very well how this list should be
read. The draft states: "The mobile node and the Home Agent MUST support
the requirements listed in Section 4 of RFC 3776 with the following
exceptions" (btw, s/support/fulfill). I'd expect a clear reference to
requirements in rfc3776, but I found sometimes difficult to match the
requirements and to understand what really changes. Isn't much clearer
to state all the requirements (old and new ones)? More details below.

- section 3.2, bullet 1: in order to be more adherent to rfc 3776, I'd
say "It is not required to configure security policies security policy
database entries specifically for the tunnel interface in order to
protect return routability signaling messages".

- section 3.2, bullet 2: how is this requirement different from the one
specified in rfc 3776 (4th bullet page at page 12)? Could you clarify
please?

- section 3.2, bullet 3: maybe I am missing something here, but how this
is different from IKEv1 and rfc 3776?

- section 5.1.1, last paragraph at page 11: "In the examples shown
above, the home address of the mobile node might not be available all
the time." Are you referring to the case where the HoA is dynamically
allocated? If yes, I'd mention it at least as an example. 
Moreover, the draft continues: "When the mobile node acquires a new home
address, it must add the address to the corresponding SPD entries." What
about the HA? Does the HA need to add the address to the corresponding
SPD entries or can it keep generic entries? I think it should add the
HoA in SPD entries.

- section 7: this section refers to dynamic HoA assignment. I wonder if
this procedure should be explained in this document or in the
bootstrapping document. Maybe the latter, if needed, can simply point to
this one. What do you think?

Regards,
--Gerardo

Gruppo Telecom Italia - Direzione e coordinamento di Telecom Italia S.p.A.

====================================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please send an e_mail to
[email-masked]. Thank you
====================================================================

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6