Subject: [netlmm] #132: Editorial changes from Eric Rescorla

From: netlmm <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:53:24 -0000

#132: Editorial changes from Eric Rescorla
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]      |       Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                        |      Status:  new                     
 Priority:  trivial                       |   Milestone:  milestone4              
Component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-req  |     Version:  2.0                     
 Keywords:  REQ draft                     |  
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Eric Rescorla says:

 1)

 > S 2.0.
 >     address goals on a localized mobility solution including both
 >
 > s/on/for/
 >

 2)

 >
 >     misrouted packets are dropped. This aspect of handover performance
 >     optimization has been the subject of an enormous amount of work,
 >     both in other SDOs, to reduce the latency of wireless link
 >     handover, in the IETF and elsewhere, to reduce the latency in IP
 >     handover.
 >
 > This sentence is pretty awkward. Maybe break up and rephrase?
 >

 3)

 >
 > S 2.3.
 > I found this section pretty confusing. You claim:
 >
 >     When  a  mobile  node  moves  geographically,  it  also  moves
 >     topologically between subnets. In order to maintain routability,
 >     the mobile node must change its local IP address when it moves
 >     between subnets.
 >
 > But the reference architecture you're proposing doesn't have this
 > property, right? Nor for that matter do any of the L2 solutions. So,
 this
 > seems difficult. I guess you're talking only about *MIP*, but that
 > needs to be clear.
 >

 4)

 >
 >     metropolitan region or even a small country, reducing reducing the
 >
 > remove one of these reducings
 >

 5)

 >
 > S 2.12.
 > The first time the phrase "mobility anchor" appears in this document
 > is in this head. That seems bad.
 >

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://www1.tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/trac/ticket/132>
netlmm <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/netlmm/>
_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm

---

From: netlmm <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:57:01 -0000

#132: Editorial changes from Eric Rescorla
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
  Reporter:  [email-masked]      |       Owner:  [email-masked]
      Type:  defect                        |      Status:  closed                  
  Priority:  trivial                       |   Milestone:  milestone4              
 Component:  draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-req  |     Version:  2.0                     
Resolution:  fixed                         |    Keywords:  REQ draft               
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Changes (by [email-masked]):

  * resolution:  => fixed
  * status:  new => closed

Comment:

 1) Changed.

 2) Changed to:

 This aspect of handover performance optimization has been the subject of
 an enormous amount of work, both in other SDOs and in the IETF, in order
 to reduce the latency in IP handover.

 3) Changed to:

 If the IP network has no localized mobility management, when a mobile node
 moves geographically, it also moves topologically between subnets. In
 order to maintain routability, the mobile node must change its local IP
 address when it moves between subnets. If the mobile node sources packets
 with its local IP address in the clear, for example through route
 optimization in Mobile IPv6, the correspondent node or an eavesdropper can
 use the topological to geographical map to deduce in real time where a
 mobile node - and therefore its user - is located. Depending on how
 precisely the geographical location can be deduced, this information could
 be used to compromise the privacy or even cause harm to the user. The
 geographical location information should not be revealed to nor be
 deducible by the correspondent node or an eavesdropper without the
 authorization of the mobile node's owner.

 4) Removed "or even a small country"

 5) Changed to use the terminology LMA and MAG, which is defined now in
 Section 1.1, the Terminology section.