Subject: [Mipshop] [Fwd: Re: [IANA #145903] Last Call: draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis (Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers) to Proposed Standard]

From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:06:53 -0700

FYI

Subject: Re: [IANA #145903] Last Call: draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis (Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers) to Proposed Standard
From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:51:47 -0700

Amanda Baber via RT wrote:

> Action #1:
> Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following 
> assignments in the "Internet Control Message Protocol version 6 
> (ICMPv6) Type Numbers" registry located at
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters
> 
> Type Name Reference
> ---- ----------------------------------------------- ---------
> 
> TBD1 | Router Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement (RtSolP) | [RFC-
> mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05]
> TBD2 | Proxy Router Advertisement (PrRtAdv) | [RFC-mipshop-
> fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05]
> TBD3 | Handover Initiate (HI) | [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-
> 05]
> TBD4 | Handover Acknowledge (HAck) | [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-
> rfc4068bis-05]

This one is wrong. I think the IANA considerations section in the
draft is also incorrect. The idea is that one ICMPv6 type is
allocated for the four messages listed above. It would say
something like "FMIPv6 signaling messages" (Rajeev, do you have
a better name for this?). The subtype field in this message would
tell you what the actual message is.

   2 - RtSolPr
   3 - PrRtAdv
   4 - HI
   5 - HAck

Rajeev, what happened to subtype '1'? Why was it not used? I
assume '0' is reserved.

We might have to create a new IANA registry for the subtype field.

We took the above approach so that we don't use up four ICMPv6
type allocations for this protocol.

The rest of the assignments look ok to me.

Vijay

> 
> Action #2:
> Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following 
> assignment in the "Mobile IPv6 parameters " registry located at
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters
> sub-registry: "Mobility Options"
> 
> TBD5 | Binding Authorization Data for FMIPv6 (BADF) | [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-
> rfc4068bis-05]
> 
> 
> Action #3:
> Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following 
> changes in the "Internet Control Message Protocol version 6 
> (ICMPv6) Type Numbers" registry located at
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters
> sub-registry: "IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Formats"
> 
> OLD:
> 17 IP Address Option [RFC4068]
> 19 Link-layer Address Option [RFC4068]
> 20 Neighbor Advertisement Acknowledgment [RFC4068]
> Option
> 
> NEW:
> 17 IP Address Option [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-
> 05]
> 19 Link-layer Address Option [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-
> 05]
> 20 Neighbor Advertisement Acknowledgment Option [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05]
> 
> 
> Action #4:
> Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following 
> changes in the "Mobile IPv6 parameters " registry located at
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters
> sub-registry: "Mobility Header Types - for the MH Type field in the 
> Mobility Header Reference: [RFC3775]"
> 
> OLD:
> 8 Fast Binding Update [RFC4068]
> 9 Fast Binding Acknowledgment [RFC4068]
> 
> NEW:
> 8 Fast Binding Update [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05]
> 9 Fast Binding Acknowledgment [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05]
> 
> 
> Action #5:
> Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following 
> changes in the "Mobile IPv6 parameters " registry located at
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters
> sub-registry: "Mobility Options"
> 
> OLD:
> 7 Mobility Header Link-Layer Address option [RFC4068]
> 
> NEW:
> 7 Mobility Header Link-Layer Address option [RFC-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05]
> 
> 
> We understand the above to be the only IANA Actions for this 
> document.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Amanda Baber
> (on behalf of IANA)
> 
> 
>> The IESG has received a request from the Mobility for IP: Performance,
>> Signaling and Handoff Optimization WG (mipshop) to consider the
>> following
>> document:
>>
>> - 'Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers '
>>    <draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-05.txt> as a Proposed
>> Standard
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>> final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to
>> the
>> [email-masked] mailing lists by 2008-03-15. Exceptionally,
>> comments may be sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please
>> retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>
>> The file can be obtained via
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-
>> rfc4068bis-05.txt
>>
>>
>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=14722&rfc_flag=0
> 
> 
> 

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