Subject: RE: [Mipshop] Question on HMIPv6 tunneling

From: "Soliman, Hesham" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:37:01 -0400

> On the draft it is said that a bi-directional tunnel is 
 > formed beetween 
 > the MN and MAP and all packets sent
 > by the MN are tunneled to the MAP (section 6.1 of the HMIPv6 draft).
 > 
 > i) Does this mean, that when MN is communicating to CN 
 > through HA using 
 > reverse tunneling
 > (one option in 6.1.1 of the HMIPv6 draft), there are 
 > actually three IPv6 
 > headers needed when
 > MN sends packets to CN ?
 > 
 > Like:
 > 
 >  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 >  |  Dest: MAP    Source: LCoA    |
 >  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 >  |  Dest: HA     Source: RCoA    |
 >  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 >  |  Dest: CN     Source: HA      |
 >  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

=> The last source is the HoA not the HA.

 > 
 > ii) What about when MAP intercepts packets tunneled from HA to RCoA, 
 > that already contain
 > two IPv6 headers - does MAP first decapsulate the packet before 
 > encapsulating and tunneling
 > it to the MN's LCoA ? 

=> No. Routers do not modify packets not addressed to themselves.
The MAP tunnels the packets just like the HA tunnels them to the 
MN's CoA.

thx,
Hesham

===========================================================
This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
 of the intended recipient.  Any review or distribution by others is strictly
 prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender
 and delete all copies.
===========================================================

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