Subject: [Mipshop] Information contained in FBU (FMIPv6-06)

From: "Seok Joo Koh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 14:11:15 +0900

Hi all,

In Section 3.1 of FMIPv6-06 daft, we can see the following statements:
" In the network-initiated handover, the PAR sends PrRtAdv message
  without the MN sending RtSolPr message, and provides the parameters
  necessary (i.e., link-layer address and IP address of the NAR) for
  the MN to send IP packets, as well as the network prefix for the MN
  to formulate a prospective new Care of Address. "

That is, the MN configures its NCoA, based on the information given by PAR.

BTW, as per Section 6.4.1, the FBU does not contain the NCoA.

The question is, in the network-initiated HO case,
"How can the PAR know the NCoA configured by MN ?"

Seok J. Koh

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

---

From: Rajeev Koodli <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 17:23:24 -0700

Hello Seok Koh,

> "How can the PAR know the NCoA configured by MN ?"

since PAR was tunneling to NAR's address, it was not necessary to
know new CoA. BTW, in the new version of the draft, it should be
better clarified.

Regards,

-Rajeev

---

From: "Seok Joo Koh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 10:37:10 +0900

Hi Rajeev,

> know new CoA. BTW, in the new version of the draft, it should be

Even in case that PAR is tunneling to NAR's address,
the PAR may need to know NCoA, if HI has a"new CoA option" 
for NCoA confirmation by NAR.

Hope this point could also be disposed in the new verion.

Seok J. Koh

---

From: Rajeev Koodli <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 18:50:14 -0700

> for NCoA confirmation by NAR.

Agreed. I think the expectation was that if the MN didn't
formulate NCoA as instructed in PrRtAdv, it could risk
losing "service" using NCoA.

-Rajeev