From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 02:04:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA29474 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 02:04:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLFUX-0006HF-7R for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 02:02:49 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4562nkh024128 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 02:02:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLFOD-0003mW-HM for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:56:19 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA24709 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 01:56:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLFOA-0002LH-9Y for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:56:14 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLFNI-0002Bd-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:55:21 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLFMU-00022h-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:54:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLFGF-0001p2-2H; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:48:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BJ3Zf-0004Zm-K1 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:55:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA18228 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:54:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BJ3ZZ-00060v-N2 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:54:57 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BJ3YZ-0005ru-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:53:56 -0400 Received: from osgood.cc.nd.edu ([129.74.250.227]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BJ3Xq-0005kO-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:53:10 -0400 Received: from MMCN05.cse.ND.EDU (sys.cse.nd.edu [129.74.50.188]) by osgood.cc.nd.edu (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i3T4rCBr025389 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:53:12 -0500 (EST) Received: by MMCN05.cse.ND.EDU (Postfix, from userid 9403) id 3B8FE176C03; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:57:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:57:03 -0500 From: Surendar Chandra To: mip6@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040429045703.GA9016@sys.cse.nd.edu> Reply-To: surendar@MMCN05.cse.ND.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ND-MTA-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:53:13 -0500 (EST) X-ND-Virus-Scan: engine v4.3.20; dat v4354 Subject: [Mip6] CFP: IEEE Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON04) Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=LINES_OF_YELLING, LINES_OF_YELLING_2 autolearn=no version=2.60 We apologize if you received multiple copies of this Call for Papers. Feel free to distribute it to those who might be interested. ========================================================================== CALL FOR PAPERS IEEE SECON 2004 First Annual IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks Technically Co-Sponsored By: IEEE ComSoc TCCC Santa Clara, California October 4-7, 2004 Paper submissions due (via EDAS): June 7, 2004 http://www.ieee-secon.org/2004 ========================================================================== The convergence of the Internet, communications and information technologies, coupled with recent engineering advances, is paving the way for a new generation of inexpensive mobile devices, sensors and actuators. It is the distributed and ad hoc deployment of networks of these network devices and sensors that bears promises for a significant impact, not only on science and engineering, but equally importantly on a broad range of applications relating to critical infrastructure protection and security, health care, the environment, energy, food safety, production processing, quality of life, and the economy. This new IEEE Communications Society conference will provide a forum to exchange ideas, techniques, and applications, discuss best practices, raise awareness and share experiences among researchers, practitioners, standard developers and policy makers in the field of sensor and ad hoc networks and systems. The conference will be organized to provide for a degree of collegiality and continuity in the discussions of the various topics among participants from the industrial, governmental and academic sectors. Original technical papers, which address the communications, networking, systems and algorithmic aspects of ad hoc and sensor networks, as well as those that describe practical deployment and implementation experiences are solicited for presentation at the conference and publication in the conference proceedings. Papers presenting novel contributions in such disciplines as digital signal processing, communications, networking protocols and architectures, algorithms, embedded systems, middleware and information management, and novel applications are solicited. PAPERS: Two types of submissions will be accepted for review in this conference: * FULL papers describing original, previously unpublished research work, experimental efforts, practical experiences, and industrial and commercial developments in sensor and ad hoc communications and networks. Papers with a deep focus on a specific discipline or stimulated by the synergistic interaction of diverse disciplines are encouraged. * SHORT papers focusing on future research directions, industry challenges and novel approaches in the field of sensor and ad hoc communications and networks. Papers in this category must be visionary, innovative and forward- looking. Particular topics of interest include, but are not limited to: * New architectures, protocols and access control to support communication, localization, time synchronization, routing and data dissemination in heterogeneous, large-scale distributed, ad hoc networks and sensor networks * Novel algorithms and theories for management, supervisory control and monitoring of distributed ad hoc networks, and techniques for the interpretation and use of sensor data in decision-making processes * Industrial and commercial developments and applications * Modeling and performance evaluation of large-scale distributed and ad hoc sensor networks, practical implementations, and real-work experiences * Theories and models on fundamental information and communication aspects of wireless ad hoc and sensor networks * Mechanisms for authenticated, secure communication and data dissemination in sensor and ad hoc networks * Integration of sensors into engineered systems, including novel techniques for sensor renewable power sources, mechanisms for on-sensor self- calibration and self-testing and efficient schemes to maximize accuracy and minimize false alarms * Chip-based systems incorporating multiple sensors, computation, actuation, and wireless interfaces * Software platforms, middleware and tools for ad hoc and sensor network applications development, deployment and management TUTORIALS AND PANELS: Proposals for tutorials and panels on current topics in the field of ad hoc and sensor networking and applications are solicited. Panels related to the commercial application and development of sensors and ad hoc networks are especially encouraged. DEMOS AND EXPO: Demonstrations that showcase the practical implementations, industrial and commercial developments, and new applications for ad hoc and sensor networks are solicited. SUBMISSION AND REVIEW PROCESS: * All submissions will be handled electronically via EDAS (http://edas.info). Please refer to the appropriate link and information at the conference website, http://www.ieee-secon.org/2004. * The conference will only accept for review original papers that have not been previously published and are not currently under review by another conference or journal. All submissions will be handled electronically and must be in PDF or PostScript format. * The length of FULL papers (describing original, previously unpublished research work, experimental efforts, practical experiences, etc.) must NOT exceed 10 IEEE conference-style pages (US "Letter" size, 8.5 x 11 inches) including text, figures and references, in two-column, single-space format, with a font size of 11 points. * The length of SHORT papers (focusing on future research directions, industry challenges, highly novel approaches, etc.) must not exceed 6 IEEE conference-style pages (US "Letter" size, 8.5 x 11 inches) including text, figures and references, in two-column, single-space format, with a font size of 11 points. * Papers not following these guidelines will be rejected. * All submissions will be reviewed for technical merits and relevance to the conference. * Accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings. IMPORTANT DATES: Paper submissions due: June 7, 2004 Tutorial/Panel Proposals due: July 12, 2004 Notification date: August 1, 2004 Camera-ready version due: August 20, 2004 GENERAL CHAIR: Taieb Znati, University of Pittsburgh, and NSF znati@cs.pitt.edu GENERAL VICE-CHAIR: C. S. Raghavendra, University of Southern California raghu@usc.edu TECHNICAL PROGRAM CO-CHAIRS: Sung-Ju Lee Prasant Mohapatra Krishna Sivalingam HP Laboratories UC Davis UMBC sjlee@hpl.hp.com prasant@cs.ucdavis.edu krishna@umbc.edu For more information, please visit the conference website http://www.ieee-secon.org/2004 or contact one of the conference co-chairs. TECHNICAL PROGRAM COMMITTEE Prathima Agrawal, Auburn Kevin Almeroth, UCSB Mary Baker, HP Labs Suman Banerjee, University of Wisconsin Stefano Basagni, Northeastern Elizabeth Belding-Royer, UCSB Christian Bettstetter, DoCoMo Euro-Labs Philippe Bonnet, University of Copenhagen Andrew Campbell, Columbia Erdal Cayirci, Istanbul Technical University Surendar Chandra, Notre Dame Marco Conti, IIT Institute - CNR Pisa David Culler, UC Berkeley Samir Das, SUNY Stony Brook Anthony Ephremides, University of Maryland Deborah Estrin, UCLA John Fisher, MIT JJ Garcia-Luna-Aceves, UCSC Mario Gerla, UCLA Silvia Giordano, SUPSI of Lugano Zygmunt Haas, Cornell University Richard Han, University of Colorado Paul Havinga, University of Twente Wendi Heinzelman, University of Rochester Sanjay Jha, UNSW, Sydney Anupam Joshi, UMBC Sneha Kasera, Utah Young-Bae Ko, Ajou University Robin Kravetz, UIUC Bhaskar Krishnamachari, USC Lakshman Krishnamurthy, Intel Srikanth Krishnamurthy, UCR Marwan Krunz, Arizona P.R. Kumar, UIUC Kevin Lai, HP Koen Langendoen, Delft University of Technology Bo Li, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Li Li, Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies Mingyan Liu, Michigan Richard Martin, Rutgers University Seapahn Megerian, University of Wisconsin Lynette Millett, The National Academies Thyagarajan Nandagopal (Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies) Peng Ning, NCSU Charles Perkins, Nokia Research Center Lili Qiu, Microsoft Parmesh Ramanathan, University of Wisconsin Jason Redi, BBN Martin Reisslein, ASU Paolo Santi, CNR Andreas Savvides, Yale Curt Schurgers, UCSD Sergio Servetto, Cornell Rajeev Shorey, NUS Singapore Suresh Singh, Portland State Univ Emin Sirer, Cornell University Raghupathy Sivakumar, Georgia Tech. Mani Srivastava, UCLA John Stankovic, University of Virginia William Su, Boeing Gaurav Sukhatme, USC Yu-Chee Tseng, National Chiao-Tung Univ. Cedric Westphal, Nokia Stephen Wicker, Cornell Adam Wolisz, Technical University of Berlin Mark Yarvis, Intel Corporation Qian Zhang, Microsoft Research Asia Michele Zorzi, Universita'di Ferrara ========================================================================== _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 02:04:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00015 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 02:04:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLFUa-0006JL-7u for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 02:02:52 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4562qnN024249 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 02:02:52 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLFP8-000434-Io for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:57:14 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA24733 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 01:57:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLFP5-0002W1-8T for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:57:11 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLFO8-0002L5-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:56:12 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLFNH-0002BR-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:55:19 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLFGF-0001pA-FT; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:48:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BKyOx-00040i-UK for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 07:47:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA25654 for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 07:47:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BKyOx-00033k-59 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 07:47:55 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BKyNw-0002pu-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 07:46:53 -0400 Received: from ssig.celar.fr ([192.134.105.1] helo=un.celar.fr) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BKyNS-0002aL-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 07:46:22 -0400 Received: from cinquantesix.celar.fr (cinquantesix.celar.fr [192.134.105.121]) by un.celar.fr (SMTP) with ESMTP id 6841F1B82CF for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 13:44:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cinquantesix.celar.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D243105723 for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 13:44:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cinquantesix.celar.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (cinquantesix.celar.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 14199-01-2 for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 13:44:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from celar.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by cinquantesix.celar.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E8DF105722 for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 07:44:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4097820B.1@celar.fr> Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 13:44:11 +0200 From: BOUVARD Bruno User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fr; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: fr, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cinquantesix.celar.fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] MIPv6 implemntation Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, I try to find documents, "howto" on how to implement and configure Mobile IPv6 with Free BSD version 4.9. But I'm unsuccessfull !! May you help me. Regards Bruno BOUVARD _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 04:39:00 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00290 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:39:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHqB-0005Ft-49 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:33:19 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i458XJ39020202 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:33:19 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHkU-0003ec-TX for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:27:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA29677 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:27:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLHkS-0006nc-5F for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:27:24 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHjY-0006cC-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:26:29 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHij-0006Qf-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:25:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHWc-00082L-PZ; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:13:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHPD-0005Y3-Dw for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:05:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA28615 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:05:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLHPA-0002UM-Q5 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:05:24 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHOD-0002J4-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:04:26 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHNP-0001wp-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:03:35 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45830o07763; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:03:00 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45830Sj021268; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:03:00 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405050803.i45830Sj021268@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:18:57 CDT. <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC111@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 10:03:00 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Description of issue : Presentation of ingress filtering in RO security Submitter name: Francis Dupont Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 Reference: Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt Comment type: T Priority: 1 Section: 1.1.1 Rationale/Explanation of issue: The description of ingress filtering in 1.1.1 is both incomplete and misleading. Length description of problem : First ingress filtering may be applied not only by the access ISP, secondly unicast RPF check works in the core network, even with asymmetrical routing. [http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/documents/uRPF_Enhancement.pdf] Requested change: Complete the description (first paragraph) according to RFC 2827/BCP 38 (and please cite it). Reconsider the opinions (second paragraph). Proposal: _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 04:48:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00715 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLI1s-0000dS-Sv for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:45:24 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i458jOxw002442 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:45:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHwG-0007R6-JP for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:39:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00352 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:39:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLHwD-0001Z2-HP for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:39:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHvL-0001Mi-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:38:39 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHum-00019r-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:38:04 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHlD-0003nj-2f; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:28:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHgf-0001wk-0Z for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:23:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA29458 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:23:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLHgc-00061b-48 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:23:26 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHfd-0005p4-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:22:26 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHed-0005SM-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:21:23 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i458Kco10225; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:20:38 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i458KcSj021327; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:20:38 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405050820.i458KcSj021327@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:18:57 CDT. <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC111@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 10:20:38 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Description of issue : Passive attack against privacy Submitter name: Francis Dupont Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 Reference: Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt Comment type: E Priority: 1 Section: 3 Rationale/Explanation of issue: Authors consider only active attackers when passive attackers can be a threat against privacy. Length description of problem : The privacy issue is very important because of regulation bodies and is not limited to active attacks. Requested change: Explicitely state that the privacy issue is not in the scope of the document. Proposal: _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 04:54:34 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00932 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:54:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLI5D-0001VC-OK for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:48:52 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i458mpmQ005763 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:48:51 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLI2x-0000ui-QR for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:46:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00623 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:46:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLI2u-0002rf-AD for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:46:28 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLI1s-0002gd-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:45:24 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLI18-0002Ve-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:44:38 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHvr-0007Ps-IQ; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:39:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLHqF-0005GB-21 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:33:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA29930 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:33:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLHqC-0000D5-5c for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:33:20 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHpD-00001C-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:32:20 -0400 Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLHoJ-0007Sn-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:31:24 -0400 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i458UiK19040; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:30:44 +0300 Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 11:30:44 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka Savola To: Francis Dupont cc: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-Reply-To: <200405050803.i45830Sj021268@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 On Wed, 5 May 2004, Francis Dupont wrote: > Length description of problem : > First ingress filtering may be applied not only by the access ISP, > secondly unicast RPF check works in the core network, even with > asymmetrical routing. > [http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/documents/uRPF_Enhancement.pdf] > Requested change: > Complete the description (first paragraph) according to RFC 2827/BCP 38 > (and please cite it). Reconsider the opinions (second paragraph). > Proposal: RFC3704 (BCP 84) may be worth a read here, it tries to give a better picture of ingress filtering than BCP 38.. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 05:28:20 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA02298 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:28:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIXF-0000bO-BH for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:17:49 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i459Hn6Y002315 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:17:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIPC-0006yq-OB for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:09:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01398 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:09:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLIP8-0007I4-Tu for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:09:27 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIOP-00075u-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:08:42 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLINP-0006tH-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:07:39 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLICK-0003L1-GW; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:56:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLI5u-0001jy-NA for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:49:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00803 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 04:49:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLI5r-0003TG-MZ for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:49:31 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLI51-0003HE-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:48:40 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLI4W-00034Q-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 04:48:09 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i458lXo14427; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:47:33 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i458lXSj021405; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:47:33 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405050847.i458lXSj021405@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:18:57 CDT. <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC111@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 10:47:33 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Description of issue : Improvement to 3.3.1 (spurious BUs) for CNs Submitter name: Francis Dupont Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 Reference: Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt Comment type: T Priority: 2 Section: 3.3.1 Rationale/Explanation of issue: Use the destination cache (RFC 2461 5.1) to recognize addresses with which CNs have had meaningful comminication recently. Length description of problem : RFC 2461 section 5.1 (Host) Conceptual Data Structures defines the Destination Cache as a set of entries about destinations to which traffic has been sent recently. The RO security document specifies that the node may also recognize addresses with which they have had meaningful communication in the past and sent binding updates to or accept them from those addresses. Requested change: Suggest to use the destination cache. Proposal: _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 05:47:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA02847 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:47:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIql-0006KO-NF for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:37:59 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i459bxZI024324 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:37:59 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIlN-0004ev-CQ for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:32:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA02507 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLIlK-0004Gy-0x for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:32:22 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIkO-00045C-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:31:25 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIji-0003u2-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:30:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIXU-0000eN-LJ; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:18:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIPE-0006yv-OC for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:09:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01406 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:09:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLIPB-0007IM-G8 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:09:29 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIOS-00076Q-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:08:44 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLINo-0006sW-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:08:04 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i4597Do17283; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:07:13 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i4597DSj021436; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:07:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405050907.i4597DSj021436@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:18:57 CDT. <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC111@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 11:07:13 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Description of issue : Strong disagreement vs 3.5 introduction Submitter name: Francis Dupont Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 Reference: Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt Comment type: T Priority: S Section: 3.5 Rationale/Explanation of issue: I strongly disagree with the first paragraph of 3.5. Length description of problem : The current text is: Early in the MIPv6 design process it was assumed that plain IPsec could be used for securing Binding Updates. However, this turned out to be impossible for two reasons. The first reason can be inferred from the attack descriptions above: IPsec is not designed to protect against the kinds of DoS attacks that would be possible with MIPv6. Protecting against the flooding attacks would be very difficult or even impossible with plain vanilla IPsec. The second reason is scalability. I have three points: - I agree with the last statement (scalability) only. - the word "could" in the first statement should be improved because it may be interpreted as IPsec can't be used to protect BUs when in fact the idea is that IPsec can't be the default/required mechanism. - the first reason is completely wrong IMHO. One can argue that IPsec has its own DoS issues but this is not what I can read here. Do authors really believe that the strong mutual authentication required/used by IPsec is weaker than return routability check? Requested change: Reword the first statement and remove the "first reason" (the second should be enough, and was). Proposal: Extra note: (editorial) change the 3ff0::/16 into 3ffe::/16 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 06:01:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA03801 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:01:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJCN-0004gO-6A for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:00:19 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45A0JDc018001 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:00:19 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJBG-00043f-O2 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:59:10 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03355 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:59:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJBD-0001MI-34 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:59:07 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ74-0000iz-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:54:51 -0400 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ5V-0000KC-04 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:53:13 -0400 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BLIz0-0007Qh-J9 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:46:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLImz-0005Lx-7c; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:34:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIhg-0003i4-KG for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:28:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA02346 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:28:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLIhd-0003TH-70 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:28:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIgg-0003Gu-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:27:35 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIgB-00033n-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:27:03 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i459QQo19645; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:26:26 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i459QQSj021494; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:26:27 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405050926.i459QQSj021494@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:18:57 CDT. <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC111@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 11:26:26 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Description of issue : DNSSEC bashing Submitter name: Francis Dupont Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 Reference: Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt Comment type: E Priority: S Section: 3.5 Rationale/Explanation of issue: 3.5 contains a DNSSEC bashing which is both not wellcome and technically incorrect. Length description of problem : DNSSEC works with any secure entry point, i.e., it does not require a signed root. For instance it is enough to make the IPv6 reverse tree signed by the 3 RIRs to deploy the scheme described in 3.5 in a global scale. The last paragraph is just a personal opinion of authors against DNSSEC and has nothing to do here. The last point ("nail on the coffin") is unfair because the section is about the home address authorization and the RR check does not assign and verify "ownership" of care-of addresses. Requested change: 1- Do not require a signed root. 2- Remove the last paragraph. 3- Introduce the assign and ownership verification of care-of addresses item not as an argument against DNSSEC style PKIs, but as something which can be only provided by an AAA infrastructure. Proposal: _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 06:16:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04621 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:16:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJPM-00013O-QF for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:13:45 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45ADige004044 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:13:44 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJFJ-0005YK-OM for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:03:21 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04002 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:03:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJFG-0002Mu-3f for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:03:18 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJDK-0001zq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:01:20 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJBM-0001NX-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:59:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJ3N-0001f2-58; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:51:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLIv3-0007c0-E1 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:42:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA02766 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLIuz-0006EI-Rq for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:42:21 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIu0-00062B-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:41:20 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLIsy-0005h3-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:40:16 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EFDD8983D; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:40:17 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <4098B5BB.8080504@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 12:36:59 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pekka Savola Cc: Francis Dupont , mip6@ietf.org Subject: ro-sec-00.txt & ingress filtering (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with the issue and Pekka's note as well. In the second paragraph, some of it still applies. How about this: It should be noted that ingress filtering is relatively easy to apply at the edges of the network, but almost impossible in the core network. Basically, ingress filtering is easy only when the network topology and prefix assignment do follow the same hierarchical structure. Secondly, ingress filtering helps if and only if a large part of the Internet uses it. Thirdly, ingress filtering has its own technical problems, e.g. with respect to site multi-homing, and these problems are likely to limit its usefulness. => Ingress filtering helps if and only if a large part of the Internet uses it. Secondly, ingress filtering has some technical issues, e.g. with respect to site multi-homing, and these problems are likely to limit its usefulness. Pekka Savola wrote: > On Wed, 5 May 2004, Francis Dupont wrote: > >>Length description of problem : >> First ingress filtering may be applied not only by the access ISP, >> secondly unicast RPF check works in the core network, even with >> asymmetrical routing. >> [http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/documents/uRPF_Enhancement.pdf] >>Requested change: >> Complete the description (first paragraph) according to RFC 2827/BCP 38 >> (and please cite it). Reconsider the opinions (second paragraph). >>Proposal: > > > RFC3704 (BCP 84) may be worth a read here, it tries to give a better > picture of ingress filtering than BCP 38.. > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 06:17:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04690 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:17:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJPS-00017V-2q for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:13:50 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45ADoHi004294 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:13:50 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJJM-0006m6-Tw for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:07:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04238 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:07:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJJJ-0003QP-BL for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:07:29 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJIL-0003E0-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:06:30 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJI4-00031z-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:06:12 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJD4-0004yV-Nf; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:01:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJ4m-00023v-4E for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:52:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03004 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:52:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJ4i-0000JU-II for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:52:24 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ3k-00007i-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:51:25 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ3H-0007jv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:50:55 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482A88983D; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:50:56 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <4098B83A.6010203@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 12:47:38 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francis Dupont Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: ro-sec-00.txt & ipsec in 3.5 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) References: <200405050907.i4597DSj021436@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> In-Reply-To: <200405050907.i4597DSj021436@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Francis Dupont wrote: > Description of issue : Strong disagreement vs 3.5 introduction > Submitter name: Francis Dupont > Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr > Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 > Reference: > Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt > Comment type: T > Priority: S > Section: 3.5 > Rationale/Explanation of issue: > I strongly disagree with the first paragraph of 3.5. > Length description of problem : > The current text is: > Early in the MIPv6 design process it was assumed that plain IPsec > could be used for securing Binding Updates. However, this turned out > to be impossible for two reasons. The first reason can be inferred > from the attack descriptions above: IPsec is not designed to protect > against the kinds of DoS attacks that would be possible with MIPv6. > Protecting against the flooding attacks would be very difficult or > even impossible with plain vanilla IPsec. The second reason is > scalability. > > I have three points: > - I agree with the last statement (scalability) only. Ok. > - the word "could" in the first statement should be improved because > it may be interpreted as IPsec can't be used to protect BUs when > in fact the idea is that IPsec can't be the default/required mechanism. I'd be willing to look at proposed text. Some rewording might be OK. > - the first reason is completely wrong IMHO. One can argue that IPsec > has its own DoS issues but this is not what I can read here. Do authors > really believe that the strong mutual authentication required/used by > IPsec is weaker than return routability check? I don't like the current text either. It talks about DoS attacks in a way that can be interpreted in the wrong way. OTOH, I don't agree with you above either, when you say that strong mutual authentication is better than RR. The problem with strong mutual authentication is that it does not address the authorization issue (except perhaps in limited cases, and certainly not in a scalable way). But perhaps its easy for us to find agreement by expanding a bit the scalability reason. For instance, we can state the requirements, such as being able to show some form of "address ownership", and mention the problems in getting something IPsec and certificates to provide that in a large scale, even if your laptop and home server could be set up this way. > Requested change: > Reword the first statement and remove the "first reason" (the second > should be enough, and was). > > Proposal: > > Extra note: (editorial) change the 3ff0::/16 into 3ffe::/16 Thanks for noticing this. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 06:17:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04755 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:17:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJPU-00019I-6B for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:13:52 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45ADqhv004411 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:13:52 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJLH-0007N1-33 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:09:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04310 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:09:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJLD-0003qE-D3 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:09:27 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJKL-0003eF-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:08:34 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJJx-0003Rq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:08:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJD8-00050L-CU; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:01:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJBN-0004FH-3q for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:59:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03378 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:59:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJBJ-0001N4-CV for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:59:13 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ7A-0000kl-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:54:57 -0400 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ5X-0000KC-01 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:53:15 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BLIvR-0007K5-Q0 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:42:49 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964A28983D; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:42:47 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <4098B651.8090500@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 12:39:30 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francis Dupont Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Spurious BUs & Destination Cache (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) References: <200405050847.i458lXSj021405@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> In-Reply-To: <200405050847.i458lXSj021405@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think I agree about the issue as such. However, I don't think ro-sec is the place to dictate _how_ things are to be done. Rather, it is an explanation of the concepts. So I'd be fine even if the text didn't talk about the destination cache. But I don't mind changing it either. --Jari Francis Dupont wrote: > Description of issue : Improvement to 3.3.1 (spurious BUs) for CNs > Submitter name: Francis Dupont > Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr > Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 > Reference: > Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt > Comment type: T > Priority: 2 > Section: 3.3.1 > Rationale/Explanation of issue: > Use the destination cache (RFC 2461 5.1) to recognize addresses with > which CNs have had meaningful comminication recently. > Length description of problem : > RFC 2461 section 5.1 (Host) Conceptual Data Structures defines > the Destination Cache as a set of entries about destinations to which > traffic has been sent recently. The RO security document specifies > that the node may also recognize addresses with which they have had > meaningful communication in the past and sent binding updates to or > accept them from those addresses. > Requested change: > Suggest to use the destination cache. > Proposal: > > _______________________________________________ > Mip6 mailing list > Mip6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 06:24:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04940 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:24:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJX2-0003kD-W9 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:21:40 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45ALe7N014389 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:21:40 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJQC-0001bA-P4 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:14:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04525 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:14:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJQ9-0004t1-1f for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:14:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJPA-0004fp-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:13:32 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJOh-0004T9-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:13:03 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJE1-0005F9-88; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:02:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJC6-0004dN-7P for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:00:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03541 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJC2-0001cL-Gv for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:59:58 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ84-00017h-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:55:52 -0400 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJ5p-0000KC-01 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:53:33 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BLIor-00076p-Db for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:36:01 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980A88983D; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:35:48 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <4098B4AE.3050208@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 12:32:30 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francis Dupont Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: ro-sec-00 & passive/privacy attacks (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) References: <200405050820.i458KcSj021327@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> In-Reply-To: <200405050820.i458KcSj021327@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Changing the subject line to match the disussion better. Otherwise I agree with the issue and its proposed resolution. Thanks for raising this issue. --Jari Francis Dupont wrote: > Description of issue : Passive attack against privacy > Submitter name: Francis Dupont > Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr > Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 > Reference: > Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt > Comment type: E > Priority: 1 > Section: 3 > Rationale/Explanation of issue: > Authors consider only active attackers when passive attackers can be > a threat against privacy. > Length description of problem : > The privacy issue is very important because of regulation bodies and > is not limited to active attacks. > > Requested change: > Explicitely state that the privacy issue is not in the scope of the document. > Proposal: _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:11:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11521 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:11:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLM84-0001D7-7C for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:08:04 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45D84bB004637 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:08:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLM7o-0000sr-3u for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:07:48 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11408 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:07:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLM7m-0003uR-Hx for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:07:46 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLM6o-0003gR-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:06:46 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLM66-0003SO-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:06:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLM3C-0007l5-5S; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:03:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLLzo-0006Ld-Pw for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 08:59:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11146 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 08:59:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLLzn-00024E-9z for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 08:59:31 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLLyo-0001pz-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 08:58:31 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLLxl-0001QF-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 08:57:25 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45CuoL14321; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:56:50 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45CunSj021950; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:56:50 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405051256.i45CunSj021950@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Pekka Savola cc: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 05 May 2004 11:30:44 +0300. Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 14:56:49 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 In your previous mail you wrote: RFC3704 (BCP 84) may be worth a read here, it tries to give a better picture of ingress filtering than BCP 38.. => thanks for the pointer. Perhaps if the ingress filtering vs. multi-homing last remark is kept this RFC/BCP should be cited too, shouldn't it? Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:22:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12106 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:22:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMJy-0004WR-Gy for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:20:22 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45DKMhb017381 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:20:22 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMHX-0003fH-2t for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:17:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11911 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:17:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMHV-0006L8-J7 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:17:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMGZ-00066e-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:16:52 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMFp-0005rJ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:16:05 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMBt-00029D-Jt; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:12:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLM8f-0001Ew-Ol for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:08:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11432 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:08:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLM8e-00048x-1T for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:08:40 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLM7p-0003uv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:07:50 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLM7C-0003fb-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:07:11 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 5 May 2004 09:06:32 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: [Mip6] use of IPsec MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 09:06:32 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents Thread-Index: AcQyoC+8w0wx2XW4QGWS4VG07F8vRgAABskA From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Francis Dupont" , CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2004 13:06:32.0678 (UTC) FILETIME=[C99BF060:01C432A1] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Francis, please use an appropriate subject. Comment inline. > Description of issue : Strong disagreement vs 3.5 introduction > Submitter name: Francis Dupont > Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr > Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 > Reference:=20 > Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt > Comment type: T > Priority: S > Section: 3.5 > Rationale/Explanation of issue:=20 > I strongly disagree with the first paragraph of 3.5. > Length description of problem : > The current text is: > Early in the MIPv6 design process it was assumed that plain IPsec > could be used for securing Binding Updates. However, this=20 > turned out > to be impossible for two reasons. The first reason can be inferred > from the attack descriptions above: IPsec is not designed=20 > to protect > against the kinds of DoS attacks that would be possible=20 > with MIPv6. > Protecting against the flooding attacks would be very difficult or > even impossible with plain vanilla IPsec. The second reason is > scalability. >=20 > I have three points: > - I agree with the last statement (scalability) only. > - the word "could" in the first statement should be=20 > improved because > it may be interpreted as IPsec can't be used to protect BUs when > in fact the idea is that IPsec can't be the=20 > default/required mechanism. > - the first reason is completely wrong IMHO. One can argue=20 > that IPsec > has its own DoS issues but this is not what I can read=20 > here. Do authors > really believe that the strong mutual authentication=20 > required/used by > IPsec is weaker than return routability check? >=20 > Requested change:=20 > Reword the first statement and remove the "first reason" (the second > should be enough, and was). =3D> I completely agree with Francis here. The only real reason is scalability/reliability on global PKI. If global PKI=20 existed of course IPsec would have been a possible way to go for the default mechanism... Hesham =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:34:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12532 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:34:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMV9-0007V5-5Z for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:31:55 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45DVtEq028814 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:31:55 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMP2-0005zo-Kj for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:25:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12214 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:25:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMP0-0000SX-Uw for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:25:34 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMO6-0000EU-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:24:39 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMNE-0007nR-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:23:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMKc-0004j3-Il; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:21:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMGQ-0003N9-BW for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:16:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11809 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:16:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMGO-00064h-PI for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:16:40 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMFZ-0005qY-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:15:50 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMEv-0005Zh-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:15:09 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 5 May 2004 09:14:36 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: ro-sec-00.txt & ipsec in 3.5 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 09:14:35 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: ro-sec-00.txt & ipsec in 3.5 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) Thread-Index: AcQyoDCxJgJ7Sf0wSLyqd2sCP3epsQAAMUoQ From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Jari Arkko" , "Francis Dupont" CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2004 13:14:36.0225 (UTC) FILETIME=[E9D35B10:01C432A2] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jari,=20 I didn't see this before I generated my own subject ;) a comment below. > > - the first reason is completely wrong IMHO. One can=20 > argue that IPsec > > has its own DoS issues but this is not what I can read=20 > here. Do authors > > really believe that the strong mutual authentication=20 > required/used by > > IPsec is weaker than return routability check? >=20 > I don't like the current text either. It talks about DoS attacks > in a way that can be interpreted in the wrong way. OTOH, I don't > agree with you above either, when you say that strong mutual > authentication is better than RR. The problem with strong mutual > authentication is that it does not address the authorization > issue (except perhaps in limited cases, and certainly not in > a scalable way).=20 =3D> IMHO the real problem is the scalability, lack of global PKI. If that existed, authorisation for the HoA and CoA would have been possible. For the CoA it's trivial, a simple reachability check will do. For the HoA it is possible to add the HoA to the certificate, especially if it comes from the ISP running the HA. I know this is not ideal, but it's certainly a far cry from "impossible" as stated in the text. It's a workable soultion if global PKI was here, so we go back to the root of the problem. But perhaps its easy for us to find agreement > by expanding a bit the scalability reason. For instance, we > can state the requirements, such as being able to show some > form of "address ownership", and mention the problems in getting > something IPsec and certificates to provide that in a large > scale, even if your laptop and home server could be set up > this way. =3D> Yes that seems reasonable. Hesham =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:37:52 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12775 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:37:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMYA-0000DH-93 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:35:02 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45DZ2dI000814 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:35:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMVs-0007hn-Tb for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:32:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12481 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:32:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMVr-00025O-81 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:32:39 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMUx-0001rX-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:31:43 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMUb-0001dZ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:31:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMOU-0005xX-B4; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:25:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMMK-00057E-Bi for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:22:48 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12079 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:22:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMMI-0007Xg-N4 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:22:46 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMLV-0007Ij-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:21:58 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMKm-00070y-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:21:12 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45DKUL17871; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:20:30 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45DKUSj022101; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:20:30 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405051320.i45DKUSj022101@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Jari Arkko cc: Pekka Savola , mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: ro-sec-00.txt & ingress filtering (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 05 May 2004 12:36:59 +0300. <4098B5BB.8080504@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 15:20:30 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 In your previous mail you wrote: I agree with the issue and Pekka's note as well. In the second paragraph, some of it still applies. How about this: It should be noted that ingress filtering is relatively easy to apply at the edges of the network, but almost impossible in the core network. Basically, ingress filtering is easy only when the network topology and prefix assignment do follow the same hierarchical structure. Secondly, ingress filtering helps if and only if a large part of the Internet uses it. Thirdly, ingress filtering has its own technical problems, e.g. with respect to site multi-homing, and these problems are likely to limit its usefulness. => Ingress filtering helps if and only if a large part of the Internet uses it. Secondly, ingress filtering has some technical issues, e.g. with respect to site multi-homing, and these problems are likely to limit its usefulness. => this text is far better but still a bit vague about problems with site multi-homing: one can argue that the site multi-homing has a problem with ingress filtering, not the reverse. IMHO in order to be fair and accurate the best solution is to point to the RFC 3704/BCP 84 (giving the full name of the document). Thanks Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr PS: in the issue tracking system the RFC/BCP should replace the pointer to the Cisco enhanced uRPF document. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:45:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA13058 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:45:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMhD-00032D-Go for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:44:23 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45DiNYR011660 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:44:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMbe-0001PN-IB for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:38:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12805 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:38:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMbc-0003ag-Oz for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:38:36 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMar-0003MV-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:37:49 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMa2-00037e-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:36:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMWD-0007zK-51; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:33:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMS3-0006fY-03 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:28:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12365 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:28:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMS1-0001AG-12 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:28:41 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMR8-0000wW-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:27:47 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMQg-0000hu-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:27:18 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45DQXL18734; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:26:33 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45DQXSj022150; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:26:33 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405051326.i45DQXSj022150@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Jari Arkko cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: Spurious BUs & Destination Cache (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 05 May 2004 12:39:30 +0300. <4098B651.8090500@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 15:26:33 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 In your previous mail you wrote: I think I agree about the issue as such. However, I don't think ro-sec is the place to dictate _how_ things are to be done. Rather, it is an explanation of the concepts. So I'd be fine even if the text didn't talk about the destination cache. But I don't mind changing it either. => as the document goal (1) is to provide hints to MIPv6 implementors I believe this hint is short and useful enough to be added (i.e., priority is "should" (2)). I am adding the same kind of statement in the new OMIPv6+ I-D. Thanks Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:51:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA13368 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:51:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMiN-0003KV-Am for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:45:35 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45DjZbs012792 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:45:35 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMhU-00033z-Aa for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:44:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA13043 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:44:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMhS-0004y3-Jz for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:44:38 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMgW-0004k6-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:43:41 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMfu-0004WO-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:43:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMb3-0001CE-4W; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:38:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMWp-00083W-OC for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:33:39 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12501 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:33:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMWn-0002K9-Su for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:33:37 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMVu-000260-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:32:43 -0400 Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com ([195.101.245.16]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMV5-0001s8-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:31:51 -0400 Received: from ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.156]) by parsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Wed, 5 May 2004 15:31:48 +0200 Received: from pdico ([10.193.165.17]) by ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 5 May 2004 15:31:47 +0200 From: "Jean-Michel COMBES" To: "Soliman Hesham" , "Jari Arkko" , "Francis Dupont" Cc: Subject: RE: ro-sec-00.txt & ipsec in 3.5 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 15:33:30 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 In-Reply-To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2004 13:31:47.0872 (UTC) FILETIME=[50BC3200:01C432A5] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id JAA12502 Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Message d'origine----- > De : mip6-admin@ietf.org [mailto:mip6-admin@ietf.org]De la part de > Soliman Hesham > Envoy=E9 : mercredi 5 mai 2004 15:15 > =C0 : Jari Arkko; Francis Dupont > Cc : mip6@ietf.org > Objet : RE: ro-sec-00.txt & ipsec in 3.5 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for > raising issues w.r.t WG documents) > > > Hi Jari, > > I didn't see this before I generated my own subject ;) > a comment below. > > > > > - the first reason is completely wrong IMHO. One can > > argue that IPsec > > > has its own DoS issues but this is not what I can read > > here. Do authors > > > really believe that the strong mutual authentication > > required/used by > > > IPsec is weaker than return routability check? > > > > I don't like the current text either. It talks about DoS attacks > > in a way that can be interpreted in the wrong way. OTOH, I don't > > agree with you above either, when you say that strong mutual > > authentication is better than RR. The problem with strong mutual > > authentication is that it does not address the authorization > > issue (except perhaps in limited cases, and certainly not in > > a scalable way). > > =3D> IMHO the real problem is the scalability, lack of global > PKI. If that existed, authorisation for the HoA and CoA > would have been possible. For the CoA it's trivial, a simple > reachability check will do. For the HoA it is possible > to add the HoA to the certificate, especially if it comes > from the ISP running the HA. I know this is not ideal, but > it's certainly a far cry from "impossible" as stated in the > text. It's a workable soultion if global PKI was here, so > we go back to the root of the problem. * "operator hat" on * and in some cases, we have such a "PKI" (AAA based, DNSSEC based or classical PKI) * "operator hat" off * > > > But perhaps its easy for us to find agreement > > by expanding a bit the scalability reason. For instance, we > > can state the requirements, such as being able to show some > > form of "address ownership", and mention the problems in getting > > something IPsec and certificates to provide that in a large > > scale, even if your laptop and home server could be set up > > this way. > > =3D> Yes that seems reasonable. > > Hesham > JMC. France Telecom R&D - DTL/SSR Jean-Michel COMBES, Internet/Intranet Security E-Mail : jeanmichel.combes@francetelecom.com Phone +33 (0)1 45 29 45 94, Fax +33 (0)1 45 29 65 19 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 09:54:28 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA13506 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:54:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMnh-0004zg-BM for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:51:05 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45Dp5cd019189 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:51:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMnM-0004hX-5W for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:50:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA13334 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:50:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMnK-0006OO-Bk for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:50:42 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMmO-0006A6-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:49:45 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMlf-0005vf-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:48:59 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMhq-0003HH-Sr; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:45:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLMfU-0002Eb-9B for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:42:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12949 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 09:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLMfS-0004VH-FA for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:42:34 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMeS-0004H7-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:41:33 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLMdQ-0003qK-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 09:40:28 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45DdqL20301; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:39:52 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45DdrSj022202; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:39:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405051339.i45DdrSj022202@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Jari Arkko cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: ro-sec-00.txt & ipsec in 3.5 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents) In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 05 May 2004 12:47:38 +0300. <4098B83A.6010203@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 15:39:53 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 In your previous mail you wrote: > The current text is: > Early in the MIPv6 design process it was assumed that plain IPsec > could be used for securing Binding Updates. However, this turned out > to be impossible for two reasons. The first reason can be inferred > from the attack descriptions above: IPsec is not designed to protect > against the kinds of DoS attacks that would be possible with MIPv6. > Protecting against the flooding attacks would be very difficult or > even impossible with plain vanilla IPsec. The second reason is > scalability. > - the word "could" in the first statement should be improved because > it may be interpreted as IPsec can't be used to protect BUs when > in fact the idea is that IPsec can't be the default/required mechanism. I'd be willing to look at proposed text. Some rewording might be OK. => my English is not as good as it should be but something like "plain IPsec could be the default way to secure Binding Updates." is already better. > - the first reason is completely wrong IMHO. One can argue that IPsec > has its own DoS issues but this is not what I can read here. Do authors > really believe that the strong mutual authentication required/used by > IPsec is weaker than return routability check? I don't like the current text either. It talks about DoS attacks in a way that can be interpreted in the wrong way. OTOH, I don't agree with you above either, when you say that strong mutual authentication is better than RR. The problem with strong mutual authentication is that it does not address the authorization issue (except perhaps in limited cases, and certainly not in a scalable way). => even authentication is not authorization it is better to base the authorization on strong authentication than on RR check... But perhaps its easy for us to find agreement by expanding a bit the scalability reason. => what I asked is to remove the first reason too. For instance, we can state the requirements, such as being able to show some form of "address ownership", and mention the problems in getting something IPsec and certificates to provide that in a large scale, even if your laptop and home server could be set up this way. => IMHO the right argument is a global PKI is hard to deploy and none is available in a reasonnable timeframe. As unfortunately nobody can prove this statement is wrong by exhibing a global PKI, IMHO we don't need more. Thanks Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 12:42:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24875 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:42:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPLt-0004UI-PO for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:34:34 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45GYXOP017245 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:34:33 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPDV-0001MI-8k for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:25:53 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA23525 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:25:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLPDT-0007Uf-TA for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:25:51 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPCW-0007CU-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:24:52 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPBV-0006v0-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:23:49 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLOqS-000867-26; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:02:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLOiK-0005KT-Oo for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:53:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA22382 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:53:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLOiJ-00078a-JZ for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:53:39 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLOhO-0006rv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:52:43 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLOgT-0006Mk-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:51:46 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i45FouJ20849; Wed, 5 May 2004 08:50:56 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405051550> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from danira-pool04887.americas.nokia.com (10.241.48.87, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdQzYUKq; Wed, 05 May 2004 08:50:54 PDT Message-ID: <40990D51.5000100@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 08:50:41 -0700 From: "Charles E. Perkins" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francis Dupont CC: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents References: <200405050907.i4597DSj021436@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> In-Reply-To: <200405050907.i4597DSj021436@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello folks, I have another major disagreement with the text below. Francis Dupont wrote: >Description of issue : Strong disagreement vs 3.5 introduction >Submitter name: Francis Dupont >Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr >Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 >Reference: >Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt >Comment type: T >Priority: S >Section: 3.5 >Rationale/Explanation of issue: > I strongly disagree with the first paragraph of 3.5. >Length description of problem : > The current text is: > Early in the MIPv6 design process it was assumed that plain IPsec > could be used for securing Binding Updates. However, this turned out > to be impossible for two reasons. The first reason can be inferred > from the attack descriptions above: IPsec is not designed to protect > against the kinds of DoS attacks that would be possible with MIPv6. > Protecting against the flooding attacks would be very difficult or > even impossible with plain vanilla IPsec. The second reason is > scalability. > > The first reason that IPsec was denigrated was because of the structure of the Binding Update. The IPsec experts claimed that one could not use the destination option number as a selector for a security association. The second reason was that the area directors insisted on a scalable solution for binding updates with arbitrary correspondent nodes, but historically that was secondary. And, as we have seen, it would have been better anyway to pursue that later; even now it is burdensome to have the return routability in the same document as the base specification. So, scalability was at once mandated and yet not possible at that time with any known mechanisms. The other points were raised afterwards, historically speaking. And, try as I might, I can't get bent out of shape about the address ownership problem anyway, so I would very much object to making that anywhere near the "major" reason. I've never heard of any threats outside the realm of thought experiments involving applications with weird properties. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 13:13:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA26783 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:13:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPnh-0006b8-DW for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 13:03:17 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45H3Hng025363 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:03:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPeT-0003bG-R4 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:53:45 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25371 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:53:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLPeS-0007UJ-5k for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:53:44 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPdT-0007BZ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:52:44 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPcV-0006tX-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPT8-0007WI-4V; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:42:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPHH-0002At-8J for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:29:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA23761 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:29:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLPHF-0000oH-OO for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:29:45 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPGK-0000Ys-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:28:48 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPFb-000034-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:28:03 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45GRSD12949; Wed, 5 May 2004 18:27:28 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45GRSSj023023; Wed, 5 May 2004 18:27:28 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405051627.i45GRSSj023023@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com cc: mip6@ietf.org In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:18:57 CDT. <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC111@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 18:27:28 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Subject: [Mip6] ro-sec: IPsec & home test Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Description of issue : IPsec & home test Submitter name: Francis Dupont Submitter email address: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Date first submitted: 2004/05/05 Reference: Document: draft-ietf-mip6-ro-sec-00.txt Comment type: T Priority: S Section: 5.2 Rationale/Explanation of issue: The purpose of the home address check is messed with the authentication is not authorization issue. Length description of problem : The current text is: If one wants to replace the home address check with some cryptographic credentials, the credentials must carry proper authorization for the specific home address. For example, if the mobile nodes hands out a certificate to the correspondent node and they consequently create a pair of IPsec security associations, it is not necessarily clear that those security associations could be used to replace the home address check. Instead, if and only if the certificate explicitly states what the mobile node's home address is and that the mobile node is authorized to create bindings for its home address, home address checks may be dropped. Furthermore, care must be taken to make sure that the issuer of the certificate is entitled to express such authorization. The issue is the home address check is only a return routability check, i.e., it gives some assurance the mobile node is really reachable at the home address. Of course IPsec/IKE includes the same check (one can argue the round trips are too many :-) and usually gives far more. The real issue is an authorization one, i.e., to be allowed to establish some IPsec security associations is to be allowed to do anything. This is a standard policy issue which has nothing to do with the home address check, and usually the issue is not spurious authorization to create bindings, it is to (mis)use the authorization to create bindings to try to get higher priviledges. Requested change: Complete rewording of the paragraph. One can use text from the MN-CN IPsec I-D. Proposal: _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 13:17:15 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27089 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:17:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPpk-0007Gy-6h for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 13:05:24 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45H5O0r027951 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:05:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPiR-0004oP-Pq for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:57:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25618 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:57:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLPiQ-0000lj-5k for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:57:50 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPhR-0000Ve-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:56:50 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPgr-0000G8-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:56:13 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPU8-0008DR-AX; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:43:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLPMF-0004bR-2E for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:34:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24418 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:34:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLPMD-0002Qv-Gr for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:34:53 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPLL-000293-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:33:59 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLPKS-0001Zv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:33:04 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 5 May 2004 12:32:27 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] use of IPsec X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 12:32:26 -0400 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mip6] Template for raising issues w.r.t WG documents Thread-Index: AcQyvXpQIVQ7aacPS06vfjQipyKe1wAAPBWA From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Charles E. Perkins" , "Francis Dupont" CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2004 16:32:27.0055 (UTC) FILETIME=[8D6443F0:01C432BE] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > The first reason that IPsec was denigrated was because of=20 > the structure of > the Binding Update. The IPsec experts claimed that one=20 > could not use the > destination option number as a selector for a security association. =3D> That's true, but at the same time it's easy to fix that. A new header can be defined, as we did eventually. >=20 > The second reason was that the area directors insisted on a scalable > solution for binding updates with arbitrary correspondent nodes, but > historically that was secondary. And, as we have seen, it would have > been better anyway to pursue that later; even now it is burdensome to > have the return routability in the same document as the base=20 > specification. > So, scalability was at once mandated and yet not possible at=20 > that time > with any known mechanisms. =3D> I always thought of this as the major reason. Frankly I never took the first reason seriusly because the fix was trivial. >=20 > The other points were raised afterwards, historically speaking. > And, try as I might, I can't get bent out of shape about the address > ownership problem anyway, so I would very much object to > making that anywhere near the "major" reason. I've never heard > of any threats outside the realm of thought experiments involving > applications with weird properties. =3D> Hmmm, I guess we'll just agree to disagree about this one. I think address ownership is an important issue. It's not the=20 major reason for not using IPsec. In my mind, the major reason is the lack of global PKI. After all we use IPsec with the HA and it works fine. Hesham =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 14:40:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03762 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:40:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRCt-0005l4-L4 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:33:23 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45IXNGT022134 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:33:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLR52-0001ZJ-DP for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:25:16 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA02496 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLR50-0002aT-05 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:25:14 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLR2Z-0001oL-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:22:44 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLR0j-00012w-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:20:49 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLQrJ-0004mJ-K4; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:11:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLQjj-0000TE-Av for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:03:15 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA00851 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:03:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLQjg-0003pX-Ve for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:03:13 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLQiV-0003SM-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:02:00 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLQgi-0002hv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:00:08 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i45HxW408012; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:59:32 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405051759> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdD6n3Dk; Wed, 05 May 2004 10:59:30 PDT Message-ID: <40992B77.85EF5F07@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 10:59:19 -0700 From: "Charles E.Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Soliman Hesham CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] use of IPsec References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Hesham, Soliman Hesham wrote: >> The first reason that IPsec was denigrated was because of >> the structure of the Binding Update. The IPsec experts >> claimed that one could not use the destination option >> number as a selector for a security association. > > => That's true, but at the same time it's easy to fix that. > A new header can be defined, as we did eventually. It's easy in hindsight, especially if one disregards the other features that were deleted as collateral damage. >> The second reason was that the area directors insisted on a scalable >> solution for binding updates with arbitrary correspondent nodes, but >> historically that was secondary. And, as we have seen, it would have >> been better anyway to pursue that later; even now it is burdensome to >> have the return routability in the same document as the base >> specification. So, scalability was at once mandated and yet not >> possible at that time with any known mechanisms. > > => I always thought of this as the major reason. O.K. I am guessing we have consensus on this, then. >> The other points were raised afterwards, historically speaking. >> And, try as I might, I can't get bent out of shape about the address >> ownership problem anyway, so I would very much object to >> making that anywhere near the "major" reason. I've never heard >> of any threats outside the realm of thought experiments involving >> applications with weird properties. > > => Hmmm, I guess we'll just agree to disagree about this one. > I think address ownership is an important issue. It's not the > major reason for not using IPsec. Well, I'm easy on this. Please exhibit the threat by way of some rational application (e.g., VoIP). As I understand it, the application running on the correspondent node has to have certain characteristics: 1) no feedback from the mobile node 2) agrees to accept bazillions of incoming packets regardless of (1) Or we can try to justify by way of the distributed denial of service attack, whereby bazillions of devices in the Internet attempt to use a sophisticated Mobile IPv6 mechanism instead of just bombing the heck out of the victim with pings... (?) > In my mind, the major reason > is the lack of global PKI. After all we use IPsec with the HA > and it works fine. Yow. Global PKI. It sounded a lot better before we had John Ashcroft. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 15:13:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06047 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:13:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRj5-0000Cl-MW for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:06:39 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45J6dXm000788 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:06:39 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRZz-00083G-4l for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:57:15 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA04689 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:57:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLRZw-00047b-FC for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:57:12 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRYv-0003p2-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:56:10 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRYD-0003WP-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:55:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRS5-0004N3-PP; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:49:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRL8-0000jV-4a for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:41:54 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03880 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:41:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLRL5-0007bX-4a for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:41:51 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRKA-0007LH-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:40:55 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRJJ-0006oc-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:40:01 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 5 May 2004 14:39:17 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] use of IPsec X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 14:39:17 -0400 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mip6] use of IPsec Thread-Index: AcQyyrvB7orCMETMQ3C/QbXHfC8pkAAAyJOA From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Charles E.Perkins" CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2004 18:39:17.0040 (UTC) FILETIME=[454BD300:01C432D0] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > =3D> That's true, but at the same time it's easy to fix that. > > A new header can be defined, as we did eventually. >=20 > It's easy in hindsight, especially if one disregards the > other features that were deleted as collateral damage. =3D> That's right, for me it was easy back then because I didn't see a big benefit for piggybacking, but I guess we don't have concensus on that. >=20 > Well, I'm easy on this. Please exhibit the threat by way of > some rational application (e.g., VoIP). As I understand it, > the application running on the correspondent node has to have > certain characteristics: > 1) no feedback from the mobile node =3D> Not really, I remember having a discussion (I think on the list) where we thought it was possible for the bombing node to continue to provide feedback by guessing the=20 TCP sequence no. For instance in the case where a streaming server is being used to bomb the victim. > 2) agrees to accept bazillions of incoming packets > regardless of (1) =3D> The victim will not accept anything, but its link will be floodded nevertheless. >=20 > Or we can try to justify by way of the distributed > denial of service attack, whereby bazillions of > devices in the Internet attempt to use a sophisticated > Mobile IPv6 mechanism instead of just bombing the heck > out of the victim with pings... (?) =3D> The difference here is that the attacker is not traceable. >=20 > > In my mind, the major reason > > is the lack of global PKI. After all we use IPsec with the HA > > and it works fine. >=20 > Yow. Global PKI. It sounded a lot better before > we had John Ashcroft. =3D> :) Yes, it seems to me like there are harder problems in the world than MIPv6 security :(=20 Hesham >=20 > Regards, > Charlie P. >=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 15:13:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06048 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:13:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRj6-0000DJ-7v for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:06:40 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45J6ejJ000816 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:06:40 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRaY-00083p-9y for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:57:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA04714 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:57:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLRaV-0004Oj-Gw for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:57:47 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRZW-00044x-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:56:47 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRYX-0003hq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:55:45 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRS7-0004ND-D4; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:49:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRM3-0000p7-RB for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:42:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03908 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:42:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLRM1-00004Y-45 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:42:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRL2-0007bE-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:41:49 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRK5-00075L-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:40:49 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i45IeCb07413; Wed, 5 May 2004 11:40:12 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405051840> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdTGCvzS; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:40:08 PDT Message-ID: <409934FE.E7891B10@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 11:39:58 -0700 From: "Charles E.Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Soliman Hesham , mip6@ietf.org Subject: Correction: Re: [Mip6] use of IPsec References: <40992B77.85EF5F07@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello again Hesham, I typed something in error in my previous e-mail, please allow me to correct. Where I previously typed: > As I understand it, > the application running on the correspondent node has to have > certain characteristics: > 1) no feedback from the mobile node > 2) agrees to accept bazillions of incoming packets > regardless of (1) I should have typed: > As I understand it, > the application running on the correspondent node has to have > certain characteristics: > 1) no feedback from the victim node > 2) agrees to produce bazillions of incoming packets > regardless of (1) since, once the malicious mobile node has done its deed to victimize a care-of address, it's no longer in the picture necessarily. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 15:59:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08640 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:59:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLSSr-0008LC-Rx for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:53:58 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45JrvUS032050 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:53:57 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLSIJ-0003uf-3f for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:43:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA07702 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:43:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLSIH-0001UG-OH for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:43:01 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLSHO-0001BC-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:42:07 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLSGT-0000rd-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:41:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLS8b-0006di-AO; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:33:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLRxp-0002Yt-C4 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:21:53 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06646 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:21:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLRxo-0003Dm-0P for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:21:52 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRws-0002xH-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:20:54 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLRwA-0002Rl-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:20:10 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i45JJZr31565; Wed, 5 May 2004 12:19:35 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405051919> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from charliep.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.89, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdwAeLgI; Wed, 05 May 2004 12:19:32 PDT Message-ID: <40993E39.1D4511B8@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 12:19:21 -0700 From: "Charles E.Perkins" Organization: Nokia Research Center X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Soliman Hesham CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] use of IPsec References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Hesham, I guess you wrote this before receiving my "Correction:" e-mail. And anyway I'm not sure about whether it's relevant to the original topic of the thread, so maybe I shouldn't even send this... Soliman Hesham wrote: > => Not really, I remember having a discussion (I think > on the list) where we thought it was possible for the bombing > node to continue to provide feedback by guessing the > TCP sequence no. For instance in the case where a streaming > server is being used to bomb the victim. That would require some pretty clever synchronization and guesstimation of round trip times between victim and correspondent node. "Possible" (p <= .00...1), I'll agree with, sort-of ... Did anyone ever _show_ this?? > > 2) agrees to accept bazillions of incoming packets > > regardless of (1) > > => The victim will not accept anything, but its > link will be floodded nevertheless. Yes, oops, please see my correction. >> Or we can try to justify by way of the distributed >> denial of service attack, whereby bazillions of >> devices in the Internet attempt to use a sophisticated >> Mobile IPv6 mechanism instead of just bombing the heck >> out of the victim with pings... (?) > > => The difference here is that the attacker is not traceable. 1) The correspondent node certainly knows the responsible home address ==> traceability 2) With zombies, nobody ever cares about traceability anyway. So, we're all the way up to p=0.00...1 threats now. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 5 17:39:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13104 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 17:39:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLU68-0002F0-Ts for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:38:37 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i45LcaBq008615 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 May 2004 17:38:36 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLU0l-0007om-9S for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:33:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12861 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 17:32:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLU0i-0002E8-UX for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:33:01 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLTzl-0001vK-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:32:02 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLTyp-0001dk-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:31:03 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLTmQ-0001vP-DV; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:18:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLThM-0008G1-Tk for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:13:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12232 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 17:12:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLThK-0004KH-IR for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:12:58 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLTgC-0003hK-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:11:49 -0400 Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLTeD-00031K-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:09:45 -0400 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id i45L97308336; Wed, 5 May 2004 23:09:07 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i45L98Sj023936; Wed, 5 May 2004 23:09:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200405052109.i45L98Sj023936@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: "Charles E.Perkins" cc: Soliman Hesham , mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] use of IPsec In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 05 May 2004 10:59:19 PDT. <40992B77.85EF5F07@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 23:09:08 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 In your previous mail you wrote: >>The IPsec experts >> claimed that one could not use the destination option >> number as a selector for a security association. => rfc2401bis should reopen the door to extension headers as traffic selectors so the whole thing is not yet closed. > => I always thought of this as the major reason. O.K. I am guessing we have consensus on this, then. => IMHO this is the right argument to not make IPsec the default protection mechanism for the MN - random CN case. We don't need more, in particular personal opinions based on dubious technical assumptions. Or we can try to justify by way of the distributed denial of service attack, whereby bazillions of devices in the Internet attempt to use a sophisticated Mobile IPv6 mechanism instead of just bombing the heck out of the victim with pings... (?) => I strongly agree: I still argue that without ingress filtering one is already dead with or without Mobile IPv6 mechanism. This issue seems to be mainly FUD. > In my mind, the major reason > is the lack of global PKI. After all we use IPsec with the HA > and it works fine. Yow. Global PKI. => the question is not whether a global PKI is good or bad (?), it is whether it is or will soon be available. As the answer is *no* the argument is at least valid. It sounded a lot better before we had John Ashcroft. => this seems to be a "domestic" statement (:-). Thanks Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu May 6 03:59:56 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA25498 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 03:59:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLdk0-0002xj-CH for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:56:24 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i467uODR011382 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 6 May 2004 03:56:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLdhM-0001wB-27 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:53:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA25105 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 03:53:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLdhJ-0006Q8-Iv for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:53:37 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLdgQ-000634-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:52:43 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLdfl-0005fP-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:52:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLdZE-0006LR-Cy; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:45:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLdQh-00035d-9c for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:36:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA24300 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 03:36:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLdQe-00009P-U6 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:36:25 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLdPc-0007a0-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:35:21 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLdOb-0006tb-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 03:34:17 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3ED68983E for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 10:34:11 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <4099E9AD.10706@kolumbus.fi> Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 10:30:53 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mobile IPv6 Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] final edits to base drafts Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, We are in the final stages of publishing the base drafts as RFCs, i.e., AUTH48. I will correct the editorial issues that have been raised (but please do not ask me to change anything else). But I have a request. I have collected the input I have gotten on the editorial issues, but just to make sure I have not missed anything: if you have had an editorial issue on the final drafts, drop me an e-mail so that I can make sure it has been included. I will post a list of final modifications in a day or two. Thanks, --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu May 6 05:06:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA29101 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 05:06:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLenD-0004Yg-He for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 05:03:47 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4693lLs017520 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 6 May 2004 05:03:47 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLem5-00041G-Id for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 05:02:37 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA28928 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 05:02:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLem2-0001kT-JP for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 05:02:34 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLel5-0001Lq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 05:01:35 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLek9-0000xG-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 05:00:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLeez-0001G1-9F; Thu, 06 May 2004 04:55:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLedF-0000dL-O5 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 04:53:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA28469 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 04:53:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLedC-00068I-KW for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 04:53:26 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLecH-0005kc-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 04:52:30 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLeb7-00051c-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 04:51:18 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 6 May 2004 04:50:43 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] use of IPsec X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 04:50:46 -0400 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mip6] use of IPsec Thread-Index: AcQy1eof3cmsdZqMQ6uqfOrG4eA1FQARQQzg From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Charles E.Perkins" CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 May 2004 08:50:43.0976 (UTC) FILETIME=[377BA080:01C43347] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > =3D> Not really, I remember having a discussion (I think > > on the list) where we thought it was possible for the bombing > > node to continue to provide feedback by guessing the > > TCP sequence no. For instance in the case where a streaming > > server is being used to bomb the victim. >=20 > That would require some pretty clever synchronization > and guesstimation of round trip times between victim > and correspondent node. "Possible" (p <=3D .00...1), > I'll agree with, sort-of ... Did anyone ever _show_ this?? =3D> I guess answering this will address your earlier correction.=20 I'm not sure that how clever the estimate should be. It might not be trivial but I don't think the RTT needs to be guessed. If the segment sizes are known (i.e. before redirecting to the victim), the attacker can ack the right seq numbers.=20 They might not be the latest seq no's but=20 that doesn't matter because if the attacker acknowledges seq no 2000 and the server already sent up to 4000, acknowledging 2000 will not cause the server to stop, on the contrary it will retransmit segments.=20 Obviously I don't have any data to support the attack. OTOH, other types of attacks (e.g. MITM) can also be a bit fictitiuos IMO if the MITM is not on the MN or CN links. So while we don't have data that attacks like this already happen, it's hard to dismiss the requirement. > >> Or we can try to justify by way of the distributed > >> denial of service attack, whereby bazillions of > >> devices in the Internet attempt to use a sophisticated > >> Mobile IPv6 mechanism instead of just bombing the heck > >> out of the victim with pings... (?) > >=20 > > =3D> The difference here is that the attacker is not traceable. >=20 > 1) The correspondent node certainly knows the responsible > home address =3D=3D> traceability =3D> But in this case the home address belongs to the victim. Hesham =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu May 6 11:16:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19444 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 11:16:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLkVo-0006em-NM for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 11:10:12 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i46FACSm025588 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 6 May 2004 11:10:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLkOm-00040k-Tv for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 11:02:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA18674 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 11:02:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLkOk-0006xi-2A for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 11:02:54 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLkNb-0006Uq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 11:01:44 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLkMc-00060N-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 11:00:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLk7g-0006GO-6O; Thu, 06 May 2004 10:45:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLk1T-0003hO-Hw for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 10:38:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA17275 for ; Thu, 6 May 2004 10:38:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLk1R-0004Pt-6z for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 10:38:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLk0N-0003xo-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 10:37:44 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLjzP-00038I-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 06 May 2004 10:36:43 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i46Ea6D04175; Thu, 6 May 2004 07:36:06 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405061436> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from danira-pool050166.americas.nokia.com (10.241.50.166, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdpK650c; Thu, 06 May 2004 07:36:05 PDT Message-ID: <409A4D47.3000306@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 07:35:51 -0700 From: "Charles E. Perkins" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Soliman Hesham CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] use of IPsec References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Hesham, Soliman Hesham wrote: >Obviously I don't have any data to support the attack. OTOH, >other types of attacks (e.g. MITM) can also be a bit fictitiuos >IMO if the MITM is not on the MN or CN links. So while we don't >have data that attacks like this already happen, it's hard to >dismiss the requirement. > > But if I compare this with, say, the other trivial attacks in the news recently, it does look pretty esoteric. Furthermore, I am not at all claiming that we should just forget about such attacks. I am claiming that these attacks do not and did not provide sufficient justification for the subject of discussion, which was why IPsec was originally proclaimed insufficient to secure the original format of the Binding Update. To me it looked like piling on for who knows what purpose. > > >> Or we can try to justify by way of the distributed > > >> denial of service attack, whereby bazillions of > > >> devices in the Internet attempt to use a sophisticated > > >> Mobile IPv6 mechanism instead of just bombing the heck > > >> out of the victim with pings... (?) > > > > > > => The difference here is that the attacker is not traceable. > > > > 1) The correspondent node certainly knows the responsible > > home address ==> traceability > >=> But in this case the home address belongs to the victim. > > I thought we were talking about the case where a mobile node maliciously claims ownership of a care-of address belonging to another node (the victim), ==> the home address belongs to the mobile node, the care-of address does not. What is the attack where the home address belongs to the victim? Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 01:01:08 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA11290 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 01:01:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxRt-0000cd-KA for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:59:01 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i474x1pd002392 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:59:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxJY-0006s1-Qx for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:50:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA10838 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:50:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLxJW-0003Md-88 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:50:22 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxIc-0002yS-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:49:26 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxI6-0002Zx-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:48:54 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxFJ-0005ek-DV; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:46:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxDl-0005Pt-5I for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:44:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA10706 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:44:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLxDi-000106-H1 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:44:22 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxCo-0000c0-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:43:27 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxCD-0000Br-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:42:49 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 7 May 2004 00:42:15 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] use of IPsec X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 00:42:15 -0400 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mip6] use of IPsec Thread-Index: AcQzd3tG/xli6bysRaG5xVG23VpH+gAGqROw From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Charles E. Perkins" CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 May 2004 04:42:15.0866 (UTC) FILETIME=[ABF851A0:01C433ED] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >Obviously I don't have any data to support the attack. OTOH, > >other types of attacks (e.g. MITM) can also be a bit fictitiuos > >IMO if the MITM is not on the MN or CN links. So while we don't > >have data that attacks like this already happen, it's hard to > >dismiss the requirement. > > =20 > > > But if I compare this with, say, the other trivial attacks=20 > in the news > recently, it does look pretty esoteric. =3D> Agreed. When it comes to what we're experiencing today, the biggest problems seem to be viruses communicated over poor email clients, and worms. >=20 > Furthermore, I am not at all claiming that we should just=20 > forget about > such attacks. I am claiming that these attacks do not and did not > provide sufficient justification for the subject of=20 > discussion, which was > why IPsec was originally proclaimed insufficient to secure=20 > the original > format of the Binding Update. To me it looked like piling on for who > knows what purpose. =3D> I also don't claim that this is the reason for dropping IPsec, this type of attack is a reason for the requirement of authorisation for both CoA and HoA. The strongest reason for not using IPsec as a default mechanism, IMO, is scalability. > I thought we were talking about the case where a mobile node=20 > maliciously > claims ownership of a care-of address belonging to another node (the=20 > victim), > =3D=3D> the home address belongs to the mobile node, the care-of = address=20 > does not. > What is the attack where the home address belongs to the victim? =3D> Ok, in this case, it is traceable but it's probably not realistic for any random server on the Internet to be expected to trace it. However, I was thinking of the reverse case where a node steals another MN's home=20 address. and use it to bomb the MN that owns this address.=20 Unfortunately this is still doable with RR if the attacker is on the CN-HA path.=20 Hesham =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 01:01:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA11328 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 01:01:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxTI-0000wo-4O for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 01:00:28 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4750SMG003638 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 01:00:28 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxRO-0008VI-4y for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:58:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11227 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:58:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLxRL-0006gB-EX for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:58:27 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxQR-0006HG-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:57:31 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxPa-0005s1-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:56:38 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxJB-0006qw-O0; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:50:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLxFf-0005f8-DK for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:46:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA10713 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:46:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLxFc-0001ls-P2 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:46:20 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxEc-0001Nw-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:45:19 -0400 Received: from mail.flarion.com ([63.103.94.23] helo=ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLxEG-00010E-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 00:44:56 -0400 Received: from ftmail2000.HQ.Flarion.com ([10.10.1.120]) by ftmailgfi.HQ.Flarion.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 7 May 2004 00:44:27 -0400 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] use of IPsec X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 00:44:27 -0400 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mip6] use of IPsec Thread-Index: AcQzd3tG/xli6bysRaG5xVG23VpH+gAGqROwABaVXeA= From: "Soliman Hesham" To: "Charles E. Perkins" CC: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 May 2004 04:44:27.0647 (UTC) FILETIME=[FA8480F0:01C433ED] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi Charlie, > =3D> Ok, in this case, it is traceable but it's probably > not realistic for any random server on the Internet > to be expected to trace it.=20 =3D> Please ignore everything below this, not enough coffee for me obviously! Hesham However, I was thinking of > the reverse case where a node steals another MN's home=20 > address. and use it to bomb the MN that owns this address.=20 > Unfortunately this is still doable with RR if the attacker > is on the CN-HA path.=20 >=20 > Hesham >=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is=20 strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please = contact the sender and delete all copies. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 04:27:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA08106 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 04:27:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM0ab-0007Dz-Tb for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:20:14 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i478KD6K027772 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 04:20:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM0OL-0001xr-DM for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:07:33 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA06435 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 04:07:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BM0OI-0007fc-Lu for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:07:30 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BM0NH-0007Dz-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:06:28 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BM0MD-0006fW-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:05:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM0I1-0007Qp-6D; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:01:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLzuO-0007zK-9M for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 03:36:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02426 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 03:36:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLzuL-0002W9-Sp for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 03:36:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLztR-00025r-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 03:35:37 -0400 Received: from omgo.iij.ad.jp ([202.232.30.157]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLzsM-0001gv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 03:34:30 -0400 Received: OMGO id i477YSq2014138; Fri, 7 May 2004 16:34:28 +0900 (JST) Received: OTM-MIX0 id i477YSUK002260; Fri, 7 May 2004 16:34:28 +0900 (JST) Received: JC-SMTP from localhost (keiichi00.osaka.iij.ad.jp [192.168.65.65]) id i477YRac002584; Fri, 7 May 2004 16:34:27 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 16:33:43 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20040507.163343.109978918.keiichi@iij.ad.jp> To: eremmell@treck.com Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Minor MIPv6 draft 24 issue regarding sending BRR From: Keiichi SHIMA / =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCRWc3RDBsGyhC?= In-Reply-To: References: <20040428.102745.41167602.keiichi@iij.ad.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.0.62 on Emacs 21.3.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, From: "Ed Remmell" Subject: RE: [Mip6] Minor MIPv6 draft 24 issue regarding sending BRR Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:08:48 -0700 > > Just one question, how do you identify a correct binding update > > entry if a BRR message doesn't have HoA of MN? MN may have multiple > > bindings to one CN with different HoAs with the same CoA. > > Good point. Yes, I was aware of this reason. So, is draft 24 clear enough? > It just says that the BRR is sent to the MN, it doesn't say if it is sent to > the CoA or to the HoA. We apparently implemented it the wrong way (send BRR > to the CoA). Well, it is better if the draft explicitly says BRR must be sent to the HoA of a mobile node. It looks the editor is now finishing editorial works. I hope this clarification is included. Regards, --- Keiichi SHIMA IIJ Research Laboratory KAME Project _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 05:54:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA11648 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 05:54:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM1yf-00033i-Th for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 05:49:11 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i479n9nn011758 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 05:49:09 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM1rO-00080C-Go for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 05:41:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10642 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 05:41:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BM1rL-0007UK-2f for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 05:41:35 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BM1pj-0006gv-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 05:39:55 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BM1p0-0006Fu-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 05:39:10 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM1em-0003xl-SX; Fri, 07 May 2004 05:28:36 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM0eD-0008NK-0f for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:23:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA07824 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 04:23:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BM0eA-00076G-7p for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:23:54 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BM0cz-0006Tm-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:22:41 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BM0ba-0005e9-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 04:21:14 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47528983F; Fri, 7 May 2004 11:21:05 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <409B462A.9060507@kolumbus.fi> Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 11:17:46 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keiichi SHIMA Cc: eremmell@treck.com, mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Minor MIPv6 draft 24 issue regarding sending BRR References: <20040428.102745.41167602.keiichi@iij.ad.jp> <20040507.163343.109978918.keiichi@iij.ad.jp> In-Reply-To: <20040507.163343.109978918.keiichi@iij.ad.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Keiichi SHIMA wrote: >>>Just one question, how do you identify a correct binding update >>>entry if a BRR message doesn't have HoA of MN? MN may have multiple >>>bindings to one CN with different HoAs with the same CoA. >> >>Good point. Yes, I was aware of this reason. So, is draft 24 clear enough? >>It just says that the BRR is sent to the MN, it doesn't say if it is sent to >>the CoA or to the HoA. We apparently implemented it the wrong way (send BRR >>to the CoA). > > > Well, it is better if the draft explicitly says BRR must be sent to > the HoA of a mobile node. Agreed. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 10:51:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28343 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:51:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM6Zw-0004cB-EK for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:43:56 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i47EhurA017729 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:43:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM6Cb-0002Wk-0Y for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:19:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24933 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BM6CY-0001EX-Ir for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:19:46 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BM6BZ-0000kq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:18:45 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BM6AZ-0000ED-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:17:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM5u9-0007o5-Fj; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:00:45 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLJyy-0002uj-1L for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:50:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA06074 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 06:50:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLJyt-0004b3-UY for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:50:28 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJy0-0004OL-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:49:32 -0400 Received: from nagano.arc.net.my ([203.115.225.22] helo=mail.arc.net.my) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLJx8-0003za-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 06:48:38 -0400 Received: from arc.net.my (roppongi.arc.net.my [203.115.225.83]) by mail.arc.net.my (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 Patch 1 (built Jun 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HX8001G0M08K0@mail.arc.net.my> for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 18:48:08 +0800 (SGT) Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 18:42:03 +0800 From: Nick Kraal Subject: [Mip6] MIPv6 implemntation To: mip6@ietf.org Reply-to: nick@arc.net.my Message-id: <4098C4FB.2080805@arc.net.my> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040411 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Try this link. I hope this helps. http://www.kame.net/newsletter/20031007/ Regards, -nick/ _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 10:51:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28364 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:51:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM6Zw-0004cF-Gw for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:43:57 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i47Ehu4q017730 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:43:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM6Ce-0002XY-5y for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:19:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24938 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:19:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BM6Cc-0001FB-0K for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:19:50 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BM6Bh-0000lx-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:18:53 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BM6Ao-0000HK-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:17:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM5uA-0007pQ-2d; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:00:46 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLQig-0008T4-Vo for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:02:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA00636 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 14:02:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLQie-0003TX-Kj for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:02:08 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLQgx-000325-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 14:00:24 -0400 Received: from mail.comp.lancs.ac.uk ([148.88.3.45]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLQeZ-0002Fb-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 13:57:55 -0400 Received: from comp.lancs.ac.uk (egcsky000001.lancs.ac.uk [148.88.153.168]) by mail.comp.lancs.ac.uk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i45Hvd6r015089; Wed, 5 May 2004 18:57:41 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <40992B07.8060109@comp.lancs.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 18:57:27 +0100 From: Martin Dunmore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bouvard@celar.fr;, mip6@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Mip6] MIPv6 implemntation Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit See http://www.kame.net/newsletter/20031007/ Regards, Martin Dunmore > -----Original Message----- > From: mip6-admin@ietf.org [mailto:mip6-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of BOUVARD Bruno > Sent: 04 May 2004 12:44 > To: mip6@ietf.org > Subject: [Mip6] MIPv6 implemntation > > > Hello, > > I try to find documents, "howto" on how to implement and configure > Mobile IPv6 with Free BSD version 4.9. > But I'm unsuccessfull !! > > May you help me. > > Regards > > Bruno BOUVARD > > > _______________________________________________ > Mip6 mailing list > Mip6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 7 10:52:08 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28493 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:52:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM6Zx-0004cf-8p for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:43:57 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i47EhvOp017763 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:43:57 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM6Ct-0002aI-R8 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:20:07 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24971 for ; Fri, 7 May 2004 10:20:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BM6Cr-0001HL-GX for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:20:05 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BM6C6-0000pO-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:19:19 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BM6BK-0000M7-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:18:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BM5uB-0007r4-Iq; Fri, 07 May 2004 10:00:47 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BLSU8-0000Jw-Tg for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:55:16 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08381 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 15:55:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BLSU7-0004vB-8f for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:55:15 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BLST4-0004bJ-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:54:11 -0400 Received: from cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu ([128.138.243.152]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BLSSI-0004HG-00; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:53:23 -0400 Received: from cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu (localhost.cs.colorado.edu [127.0.0.1]) by cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i45Jk1bc049068; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:48:19 -0600 (MDT) Received: from mroe.cs.colorado.edu (mroe.cs.colorado.edu [128.138.243.151]) by cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i45Jhuba049055 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:43:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: from research.cs.colorado.edu (research.cs.colorado.edu [128.138.242.225]) by mroe.cs.colorado.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i45JhumU052404 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:43:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: from earthrise2 (admin-net-dhcp8.cs.colorado.edu [128.138.236.58]) by research.cs.colorado.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i45JhlBP014506 for ; Wed, 5 May 2004 13:43:56 -0600 (MDT) To: Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 13:43:43 -0600 Organization: University of Colorado Message-ID: <001c01c432d9$4c0514f0$b46dfea9@cs.colorado.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu id i45Jhuba049055 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 05 May 2004 13:45:58 -0600 From: basenets04-cfp@cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu X-BeenThere: basenets04-cfp@cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Mip6] BASENETS 2004, Call For Papers, New June 21 Submission Deadline Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FROM_AND_TO_SAME, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this call! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- CALL FOR PAPERS ******************************************************** * * * 1st Workshop on Broadband Advanced Sensor Networks * * (co-located with BroadNets 04) * * San Jose, CA, October 25, 2004 * * * * BASENETS 04 * * * ******************************************************** * * * http://www.basenets.org * * * ******************************************************** SCOPE The emergence and adoption of broadband wireless access standards, such as 802.16, 802.16a and 802.11a/g, offers exciting new possibilities for high-bandwidth data communication over the "last mile". A significant use of such high bandwidth may lie in the use of a variety of multimodal sensors for monitoring and control of diverse geographic areas. Such sensors may be used for remote video/audio surveillance and active monitoring of telemetry data in city blocks, highways, airports, hotels, campuses and a variety of other indoor and outdoor environments. This workshop is intended for the presentation and discussion of novel architectures, algorithms and applications of sensor networks based on the use of wireless broadband channels. Areas of interest include problems related to energy efficiency, dynamic control and reliability of such sensor network deployments, especially under the expected resource constraints on the sensor devices. Of particular interest are visions, practical case studies, demonstrations or pilots of innovative techniques for building sensor networks using either broadband local or metropolitan wireless networks. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: * Multimedia Interfaces for Wireless Sensors * Broadband vs. Narrowband Wireless Sensing * Video and Audio Sensing Applications over Broadband Networks * Distributed Multimedia Compression/Aggregation for Broadband Sensor Networks * Scalability and Performance Bottlenecks for Wide-Area Broadband Sensing * Adaptive Configuration of Broadband Sensor Networks * Power and Spectrum Management Issues for Broadband Sensing * Architectures for Broadband Sensor Networks * Applications of Wireless Broadband Sensor Networks * Security and Privacy for Broadband Sensor Networks * Broadband Sensor Networks with Mobile Nodes * Heterogeneous Wired-Wireless Broadband Sensor Networks SUBMISSION Papers should be written in English, should not exceed 20 double-spaced, single-column pages, including figures and references, and should include an abstract, not to exceed 250 words. Papers should be submitted in PDF format via the EDAS system (http://edas.info). All papers will be peer reviewed. The best papers of this workshop will be considered for possible publication in the ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks (http://www.acm.org/tosn/). IMPORTANT DATES Full paper due: June 21, 2004 *EXTENDED* Notification of acceptance: July 18, 2004 Camera-ready copy: Aug. 9, 2004 Workshop Chairs: W. Heinzelman (U. of Rochester) B. Krishnamachari (U. of Southern California) Program Committee: N. Abu-Ghazaleh (Binghamton U.) J. Apostolopoulos (HP Labs) A. Bestavros (Boston U.) A. Campbell (Columbia U.) M. El Zarki (U. of California at Irvine) W.-C. Feng (OGI) S. Gupta (Arizona State U.) R. Han (U. of Colorado at Boulder) A. Helmy (U. of Southern California) S. Jha (U. of New South Wales) H. Karl (TU Berlin) M. Liu (U. of Michigan) B. Nath (Rutgers U.) M. Papadopouli (U. of North Carolina) A. Safwat (Queens U.) I. Stojmenovic (U. of Ottawa) U. Tureli (Stevens U.) M. van der Schaar (U. of California at Davis) P. Varshney (Syracuse U.) Publicity Co-Chairs: R. Han (U. of Colorado at Boulder) H. Karl (Technical University Berlin) For more details, please visit http://www.basenets.org or contact basenets04-chairs@ece.rochester.edu _______________________________________________ basenets04-cfp mailing list basenets04-cfp@cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu http://cs-lists.cs.colorado.edu/mailman/listinfo/basenets04-cfp _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat May 8 19:00:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA01212 for ; Sat, 8 May 2004 19:00:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMamP-0005fu-5Y for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:58:49 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i48MwnWr021813 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 8 May 2004 18:58:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMalv-0005Zk-J1 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:58:19 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA01064 for ; Sat, 8 May 2004 18:58:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMals-0007SA-BU for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:58:16 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMakq-00074d-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:57:13 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMakD-0006iR-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:56:33 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMahm-0004pZ-7u; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:54:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMad3-0004J3-1e for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:49:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA00848 for ; Sat, 8 May 2004 18:49:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMacz-0004DP-V4 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:49:06 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMac1-0003rx-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:48:05 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMabY-0003Wl-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 18:47:37 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098A78984A; Sun, 9 May 2004 01:47:31 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <409D62B9.5070700@kolumbus.fi> Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 01:44:09 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jari Arkko Cc: Mobile IPv6 Mailing List References: <4099E9AD.10706@kolumbus.fi> In-Reply-To: <4099E9AD.10706@kolumbus.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here are the issues that I intend to report to the RFC Editor: - 329 Adopted Three/two rules in 10.3.1 - 328 Adopted Token/nonce terminology in 9.4.4 - 327 Open Connecthathon issues - 326 Adopted Section 9.3.2 typo - 325 Adopted BRR directly to the home address without RH? - 324 Adopted Refresh interval is not absolute time - 323 Adopted Not really silent discard if you send MPS - 322 Adopted Typos reported by Jee - 321 Adopted Typo reported by Jinmei - 320 Adopted IANA and Status Codes These all appear straightforward, though it would be good if you can check them out and give me an e-mail that you find them OK. However, issue 327 is unclear to me. At the very least we need suggested text for it. The detailed descriptions can be found from: http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/MIPv6-Issues.html --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat May 8 19:51:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA03859 for ; Sat, 8 May 2004 19:51:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMbZT-0003cX-51 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:49:31 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i48NnVIN013913 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 8 May 2004 19:49:31 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMbZG-0003WG-9R for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:49:18 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA03754 for ; Sat, 8 May 2004 19:49:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMbZE-0003bc-Gs for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:49:16 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMbYJ-0003F3-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:48:20 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMbXs-0002s2-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:47:52 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMbV8-00032C-0Y; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:45:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMbTf-0002up-HU for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:43:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA03614 for ; Sat, 8 May 2004 19:43:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMbTd-0001Rd-OI for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:43:29 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMbSY-00014U-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:42:23 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMbRq-0000hG-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 08 May 2004 19:41:38 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9C38984A for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:41:38 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <409D6F69.2080508@kolumbus.fi> Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 02:38:17 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mobile IPv6 Mailing List Subject: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts References: <4099E9AD.10706@kolumbus.fi> In-Reply-To: <4099E9AD.10706@kolumbus.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Still some more issues, full list below: - 333 Adopted Soohong's nit on 8.2 - 332 Open Section 11.7.1 should not indicate HAO is optional - 331 Adopted? Hesham's on-link care-of address clarification - 330 Open Frank Quick's IKE phase etc clarifications - 329 Adopted Three/two rules in 10.3.1 - 328 Adopted Token/nonce terminology in 9.4.4 - 327 Open Connecthathon issues - 326 Adopted Section 9.3.2 typo - 325 Adopted BRR directly to the home address without RH? - 324 Adopted Refresh interval is not absolute time - 323 Adopted Not really silent discard if you send MPS - 322 Adopted Typos reported by Jee - 321 Adopted Typo reported by Jinmei - 320 Adopted IANA and Status Codes Most of these appear straightforward, though it would be good if you can check them out and give me an e-mail that you find them OK. However, issues 327, 330, and 332 are unclear to me. At the very least we need suggested text for them and agreement on the list. Otherwise they'll be dropped from the current RFC and handled in a future update. The detailed descriptions can be found from: http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/MIPv6-Issues.html --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 9 02:29:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA18068 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:29:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMhoC-0006q3-1T for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:29:08 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i496T7qj026226 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:29:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMhhs-0005Fc-TD for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:22:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10974 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:22:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMhhp-00048E-6y for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:22:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMhgr-0003lG-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:21:34 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMhfq-0003OU-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:20:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMhcV-0003bx-Ed; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:17:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMhb5-00030e-Hv for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:15:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03836 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:15:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMhb1-0001YG-Ru for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:15:31 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMha4-0001Bs-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:14:33 -0400 Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMhZX-0000pE-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:13:59 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i496DxB10070 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 09:13:59 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Sun, 9 May 2004 09:13:52 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.30 2004040916 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i496DqYb024267 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 09:13:52 +0300 Received: from mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.97) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00eh8quF; Sun, 09 May 2004 09:13:51 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i496DoH01219 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 09:13:50 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from mvebe001.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.18.140.37]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Sun, 9 May 2004 01:13:50 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Date: Sat, 8 May 2004 23:13:49 -0700 Message-ID: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Thread-Index: AcQ1Vt4f/oR/wwntQ1K7MGdZMkLClAAMhKYw To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 May 2004 06:13:50.0543 (UTC) FILETIME=[CBE0FDF0:01C4358C] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi Jari, I went through the list. looks fine. issue 332 needs some clarification. Home Address option MUST=20 be present in the BU if the BU is sent from a visited link.=20 If the BU is sent from the home link (a de-registration BU=20 from home), the Home Address option MAY be omitted. in this=20 case, the source address is used as the home address. issue 327 has 4 issues. 1 - ? 2 - HA can skip checking the source address on the outer tunnel if packet is protected by IPsec. for all other tunneled packets, the HA MUST verify the source address on the outer tunnel against the CoA in the binding cache entry. 3 - it is not clear to me why the MN is reverse tunneling=20 the HoTi message from the home link. I was at=20 Connectathon, but dont remember the discussion. :( 4 - this just needs a clarification. if the MN is not =20 including a Home Address Option in a de-registration BU from the home link, it MUST set the lifetime to 0. if the lifetime is 0, it is always a de-registration BU. Vijay > -----Original Message----- > From: mip6-admin@ietf.org [mailto:mip6-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of ext > Jari Arkko > Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 4:38 PM > To: Mobile IPv6 Mailing List > Subject: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts >=20 >=20 >=20 > Still some more issues, full list below: >=20 > - 333 Adopted Soohong's nit on 8.2 > - 332 Open Section 11.7.1 should not indicate HAO is optional > - 331 Adopted? Hesham's on-link care-of address clarification > - 330 Open Frank Quick's IKE phase etc clarifications > - 329 Adopted Three/two rules in 10.3.1 > - 328 Adopted Token/nonce terminology in 9.4.4 > - 327 Open Connecthathon issues > - 326 Adopted Section 9.3.2 typo > - 325 Adopted BRR directly to the home address without RH? > - 324 Adopted Refresh interval is not absolute time > - 323 Adopted Not really silent discard if you send MPS > - 322 Adopted Typos reported by Jee > - 321 Adopted Typo reported by Jinmei > - 320 Adopted IANA and Status Codes >=20 > Most of these appear straightforward, though it would be > good if you can check them out and give me an e-mail > that you find them OK. >=20 > However, issues 327, 330, and 332 are unclear to me. > At the very least we need suggested text for them and > agreement on the list. Otherwise they'll be dropped > from the current RFC and handled in a future update. >=20 > The detailed descriptions can be found from: >=20 > http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/MIPv6-Issues.html >=20 > --Jari >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Mip6 mailing list > Mip6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 >=20 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 9 02:50:51 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA19984 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:50:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMi6p-0001LI-1u for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:48:23 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i496mN9n005161 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:48:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMi3N-0000pG-4C for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:44:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA19755 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:44:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMi3J-0004fx-BV for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:44:45 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMi2H-0004Fu-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:43:42 -0400 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMi1Q-0002ue-01 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:42:50 -0400 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BMhno-0004LY-9P for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:28:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMhhM-00056M-SM; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:22:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMhfr-0004fX-5C for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:20:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA08879 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 02:20:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMhfn-0003O1-Ch for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:20:27 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMher-00031j-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:19:29 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMheC-0002Tp-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 02:18:48 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i496IGI24639; Sat, 8 May 2004 23:18:16 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405090618> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from danira-pool055159.americas.nokia.com (10.241.55.159, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdGtxTZI; Sat, 08 May 2004 23:18:14 PDT Message-ID: <409DCD1B.7080109@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Sat, 08 May 2004 23:18:03 -0700 From: Vijay Devarapalli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi CC: mip6@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] Issue 330 Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi Jari, I think the first two suggestions should be adopted. I am not sure about the 3rd one. > 1. Section 5.1, page 21: > > When IKE version 1 is used with preshared secret authentication > between the mobile node and the home agent, aggressive mode MUST be > used. Similarly, the ID_IPV6_ADDR Identity Payload MUST NOT be used > in IKEv1 phase 1. > > might be revised to separate the sentences, as follows: > > When IKE version 1 is used with preshared secret authentication > between the mobile node and the home agent, aggressive mode MUST be > used. > > The ID_IPV6_ADDR Identity Payload MUST NOT be used in IKEv1 phase 1. [a reference to the ipsec > i-d would be useful here if appropriate] > > 2. Section 11.3.2, page 113: > > o In addition, for all security associations bound to the mobile > node's home address established by IKE, the mobile node MUST > include an ISAKMP Identification Payload [8] in the IKE exchange, > giving the mobile node's home address as the initiator of the > Security Association [7]. > > It is not critical, but I would suggest that "the IKE exchange" read "the IKE phase 2 exchange". Vijay _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 9 15:15:43 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18082 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 15:15:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMtk5-0000RE-SL for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 15:13:42 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i49JDfgP001684 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 9 May 2004 15:13:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMtch-0005EU-Vl for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 15:06:04 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA17005 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 15:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMtcf-0006Xl-1Z for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 15:06:01 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMtbi-0006G9-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 15:05:03 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMtay-0005yW-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 15:04:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMtWr-0007HG-Mt; Sun, 09 May 2004 15:00:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMtUw-00075M-GG for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 14:58:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA16439 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 14:57:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMtUt-00048w-Ly for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 14:57:59 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMtTy-0003rC-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 14:57:02 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMtTD-0003HG-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 14:56:15 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i49ItfV07394; Sun, 9 May 2004 11:55:41 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405091855> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from daec-linuxvpn058147.americas.nokia.com (10.241.58.147, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdFbcntO; Sun, 09 May 2004 11:55:29 PDT Message-ID: <409E7E95.1000700@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 11:55:17 -0700 From: Vijay Devarapalli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040430 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > issue 327 has 4 issues. > 3 - it is not clear to me why the MN is reverse tunneling > the HoTi message from the home link. I was at > Connectathon, but dont remember the discussion. :( I remember now. the MN sends a de-registration BU from the home link, and wants to send a HoTi message from the home link immediately. if the HA deletes the SPD entries when it deletes the binding cache entry, a reverse tunneled HoTi message could get dropped. it was suggested the Home Agent keep the SPD entries alive for a short while before deleting the SPD entries. or the MN could wait for the binding ack to come back when de-registering from the home link and then send a direct HoTi message (not reverse tunneled) to the CN. Vijay _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 9 17:46:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23531 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:46:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw63-0007IX-7N for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:44:31 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i49LiVO5028045 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:44:31 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw4e-00070S-Tx for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:43:04 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23385 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:43:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMw4c-00060I-Da for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:43:02 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMw3g-0005i9-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:42:04 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMw2g-0005Q1-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:41:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw0j-0006Zl-5c; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:39:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMvzp-0006Pr-OY for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:38:06 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23171 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:38:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMvzn-0004U3-AR for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:38:03 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMvyq-0004BC-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:37:04 -0400 Received: from fep06-0.kolumbus.fi ([193.229.0.57] helo=fep06-app.kolumbus.fi) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMvxx-0003u0-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:36:09 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi ([80.186.217.250]) by fep06-app.kolumbus.fi with ESMTP id <20040509213608.SCDB23473.fep06-app.kolumbus.fi@kolumbus.fi>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:08 +0300 Message-ID: <409EA37C.1020201@kolumbus.fi> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 00:32:44 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Issue 332 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts) References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com wrote: > issue 332 needs some clarification. Home Address option MUST > be present in the BU if the BU is sent from a visited link. > If the BU is sent from the home link (a de-registration BU > from home), the Home Address option MAY be omitted. in this > case, the source address is used as the home address. How about this. In Section 10.3.1, change o A Home Address destination option MUST be present in the message. => o A Home Address destination option MUST be present in the message (unless the home address appears as the source address). In Section 11.7.1, change o The packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option, giving the mobile node's home address for the binding. => o The packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option (unless it is sent with the home address as the source address), giving the mobile node's home address for the binding. This seems clear enough. But I worry a bit that we're forgetting something; I can't remember why text was written the way it is. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 9 17:48:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23652 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:48:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw8B-0007Tv-FX for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:46:43 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i49Lkhgp028751 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:46:43 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw6d-0007KW-Mb for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:45:07 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23475 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:45:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMw6b-0006cr-7r for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:45:05 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMw5i-0006Kd-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:44:10 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMw4l-00061d-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:43:11 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw0j-0006Zt-KD; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:39:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMvzq-0006Pt-Br for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:38:06 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23174 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:38:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMvzn-0004U8-Tb for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:38:04 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMvyq-0004BK-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:37:05 -0400 Received: from fep06-0.kolumbus.fi ([193.229.0.57] helo=fep06-app.kolumbus.fi) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMvy6-0003u5-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:36:18 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi ([80.186.217.250]) by fep06-app.kolumbus.fi with ESMTP id <20040509213618.SCEL23473.fep06-app.kolumbus.fi@kolumbus.fi>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:18 +0300 Message-ID: <409EA386.8020303@kolumbus.fi> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 00:32:54 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vijay Devarapalli CC: mip6@ietf.org References: <409DCD1B.7080109@iprg.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <409DCD1B.7080109@iprg.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] Re: Issue 330 Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Vijay Devarapalli wrote: > hi Jari, > > I think the first two suggestions should be adopted. I am not sure > about the 3rd one. > >> 1. Section 5.1, page 21: >> >> When IKE version 1 is used with preshared secret authentication >> between the mobile node and the home agent, aggressive mode MUST be >> used. Similarly, the ID_IPV6_ADDR Identity Payload MUST NOT be used >> in IKEv1 phase 1. >> >> might be revised to separate the sentences, as follows: >> >> When IKE version 1 is used with preshared secret authentication >> between the mobile node and the home agent, aggressive mode MUST be >> used. >> >> The ID_IPV6_ADDR Identity Payload MUST NOT be used in IKEv1 phase Breaking the paragraph in two is fine. >> 1. [a reference to the ipsec >> i-d would be useful here if appropriate] Maybe not, if there's no additional explanation in the other draft either. >> 2. Section 11.3.2, page 113: >> >> o In addition, for all security associations bound to the mobile >> node's home address established by IKE, the mobile node MUST >> include an ISAKMP Identification Payload [8] in the IKE exchange, >> giving the mobile node's home address as the initiator of the >> Security Association [7]. >> >> It is not critical, but I would suggest that "the IKE exchange" read >> "the IKE phase 2 exchange". Right. Seems like the third issue, the rationale behind not using IPV6_ADDR in phase 1, has already been dealt with in e.g. issue 305. I don't think we should add the rationale to the RFC at this stage. This leaves us with the first two modifications. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 9 17:49:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23684 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:49:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw9d-0007b7-MY for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:48:13 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i49LmDuc029199 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:48:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw6j-0007OL-Vf for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:45:14 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23490 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:45:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMw6h-0006dd-If for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:45:11 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMw5t-0006Lz-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:44:22 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMw5P-000638-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:43:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMw0k-0006a5-A2; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:39:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BMvzt-0006RG-KD for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:38:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23189 for ; Sun, 9 May 2004 17:38:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BMvzr-0004UY-6I for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:38:07 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BMvyu-0004Bz-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:37:08 -0400 Received: from fep06-0.kolumbus.fi ([193.229.0.57] helo=fep06-app.kolumbus.fi) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BMvyQ-0003uF-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:36:38 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi ([80.186.217.250]) by fep06-app.kolumbus.fi with ESMTP id <20040509213638.SCFE23473.fep06-app.kolumbus.fi@kolumbus.fi>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:38 +0300 Message-ID: <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 00:33:14 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com wrote: > issue 327 has 4 issues. > 1 - ? I think part 1 shows that a clarification is needed in the text. Here's the suggested edit: Change Mobility Data = care-of address | correspondent | MH Data Authenticator = First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, Mobility Data)) Where | denotes concatenation and "correspondent" is the IPv6 address of the correspondent node. Note that, if the message is sent to a destination which is itself mobile, the "correspondent" address may not be the address found in the Destination Address field of the IPv6 header; instead the home address from the type 2 Routing header should be used. to Mobility Data = care-of address | correspondent | MH Data Authenticator = First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, Mobility Data)) Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node if the Binding Update succeeds. Note that this address might be different from the source address of the Binding Update message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. "Correspondent" is the IPv6 address of the correspondent node. Note that, if the message is sent to a destination which is itself mobile, the "correspondent" address may not be the address found in the Destination Address field of the IPv6 header; instead the home address from the type 2 Routing header should be used. > 2 - HA can skip checking the source address on the outer > tunnel if packet is protected by IPsec. for all other > tunneled packets, the HA MUST verify the source address > on the outer tunnel against the CoA in the binding cache > entry. Right. Do you have suggested text? Do we need text? > 3 - it is not clear to me why the MN is reverse tunneling > the HoTi message from the home link. I was at > Connectathon, but dont remember the discussion. :( > > I remember now. the MN sends a de-registration BU from the > home link, and wants to send a HoTi message from the home > link immediately. if the HA deletes the SPD entries when it > deletes the binding cache entry, a reverse tunneled HoTi > message could get dropped. it was suggested the Home Agent > keep the SPD entries alive for a short while before deleting > the SPD entries. > > or the MN could wait for the binding ack to come back when > de-registering from the home link and then send a direct HoTi > message (not reverse tunneled) to the CN. I like the latter approach better. Is there a need to change text? > 4 - this just needs a clarification. if the MN is not > including a Home Address Option in a de-registration > BU from the home link, it MUST set the lifetime to 0. > if the lifetime is 0, it is always a de-registration BU. Yes. Need for text change? --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 01:23:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA10213 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:23:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN3E0-0005M6-1z for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:21:12 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4A5LCLS020586 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:21:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN3CF-0005Ar-Ah for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:19:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA10059 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:19:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BN3CC-0005wj-Dq for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:19:20 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BN3BD-0005ek-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:18:20 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BN3AA-0005CD-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:17:14 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN374-0004fO-Df; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:14:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN31c-0003qb-A2 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:08:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA09811 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:08:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BN31Z-0002oF-EI for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:08:21 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BN30e-0002XU-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:07:24 -0400 Received: from ns.64translator.com ([202.214.123.16] helo=mail.64translator.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BN30E-0001yv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:06:58 -0400 Received: from bahamas.64translator.com ([10.21.32.3]) by mail.64translator.com (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4A54cAN051860; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:05:01 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com) Received: from localhost (dhcp165.64translator.com [10.21.32.165]) by bahamas.64translator.com (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with SMTP id i4A54auJ007574; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:04:37 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com) Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 14:04:31 +0900 From: Yukiyo Akisada To: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi Cc: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com, mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Message-Id: <20040510140431.4a588024.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> In-Reply-To: <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> Organization: Yokogawa Electric Corporation X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.3 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Jari and Vijay. I have some comments about issue 327. On Mon, 10 May 2004 00:33:14 +0300 Jari Arkko wrote: > > 2 - HA can skip checking the source address on the outer > > tunnel if packet is protected by IPsec. for all other > > tunneled packets, the HA MUST verify the source address > > on the outer tunnel against the CoA in the binding cache > > entry. > > Right. Do you have suggested text? Do we need text? For me, I need the text. At least I was confusing about this behavior when developping the conformance test. Especially, the last paragraph in section 10.4.5 should be more clear. Vijay's sentence makes me clear. > > 4 - this just needs a clarification. if the MN is not > > including a Home Address Option in a de-registration > > BU from the home link, it MUST set the lifetime to 0. > > if the lifetime is 0, it is always a de-registration BU. > > Yes. Need for text change? I also need the text change about this. It also confused me. Regards. ---- Yukiyo Akisada _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 04:35:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA17327 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:35:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN69E-0008Bq-0Z for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:28:30 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4A8SRrm031483 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:28:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN66M-0007Uf-Md for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:25:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA16616 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:25:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BN66J-0006Xc-UK for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:25:28 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BN65K-0006E5-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:24:27 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BN64F-0005fd-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:23:19 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN5wP-0006IK-Eo; Mon, 10 May 2004 04:15:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BN4sr-00089l-GH for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 03:07:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA13998 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 03:07:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BN4sn-0006ir-Iz for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 03:07:25 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BN4ro-0006QO-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 03:06:25 -0400 Received: from [202.108.45.71] (helo=126.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BN4qd-0005rL-00; Mon, 10 May 2004 03:05:16 -0400 Received: from RavProxy (unknown [210.82.111.70]) by smtp2 (Coremail) with SMTP id OYAYlqUpn0ACAG9G.1 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:05:11 +0800 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [210.82.111.70] Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 15:07:12 +0800 From: "dolphiny" To: "mip6-request@ietf.org" Cc: "mip6" X-mailer: Foxmail 5.0 [cn] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Subject: [Mip6] Re: Welcome to the "Mip6" mailing list (Digest mode) Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MIME_BASE64_TEXT, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 VGhhbmtzISAgQW5kIGhlcmUgaXMgbXkgZW1haWw6DQoNCmRvbHBoaW55QDEyNi5jb20gIA0KDQoN Cg0KPT09PT09PSAyMDA0LTA1LTEwIDAwOjU4OjUwIMT61NrAtNDF1tDQtLXAo7o9PT09PT09DQoN Cj5XZWxjb21lIHRvIHRoZSBNaXA2QGlldGYub3JnIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCENCj4NCj5UbyBwb3N0 IHRvIHRoaXMgbGlzdCwgc2VuZCB5b3VyIGVtYWlsIHRvOg0KPg0KPiAgbWlwNkBpZXRmLm9yZw0K Pg0KPkdlbmVyYWwgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gYWJvdXQgdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBpcyBhdDoNCj4N Cj4gIGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbWlwNg0KPg0KPioqKioq KioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioq KioqKioqKioqKioqDQo+DQo+DQo+ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBOb3Rl IFdlbGwNCj4NCj5BbGwgc3RhdGVtZW50cyByZWxhdGVkIHRvIHRoZSBhY3Rpdml0aWVzIG9mIHRo ZSBJRVRGIGFuZCBhZGRyZXNzZWQgdG8NCj50aGUgSUVURiBhcmUgc3ViamVjdCB0byBhbGwgcHJv dmlzaW9ucyBvZiBTZWN0aW9uIDEwIG9mIFJGQyAyMDI2LA0KPndoaWNoIGdyYW50cyB0byB0aGUg SUVURiBhbmQgaXRzIHBhcnRpY2lwYW50cyBjZXJ0YWluIGxpY2Vuc2VzIGFuZA0KPnJpZ2h0cyBp biBzdWNoIHN0YXRlbWVudHMuIFN1Y2ggc3RhdGVtZW50cyBpbmNsdWRlIHZlcmJhbCBzdGF0ZW1l bnRzDQo+aW4gSUVURiBtZWV0aW5ncywgYXMgd2VsbCBhcyB3cml0dGVuIGFuZCBlbGVjdHJvbmlj IGNvbW11bmljYXRpb25zDQo+bWFkZSBhdCBhbnkgdGltZSBvciBwbGFjZSwgd2hpY2ggYXJlIGFk ZHJlc3NlZCB0bw0KPg0KPiAgICAgICAgKiB0aGUgSUVURiBwbGVuYXJ5IHNlc3Npb24sDQo+ICAg ICAgICAqIGFueSBJRVRGIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgb3IgcG9ydGlvbiB0aGVyZW9mLA0KPiAgICAg ICAgKiB0aGUgSUVTRywgb3IgYW55IG1lbWJlciB0aGVyZW9mIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiB0aGUgSUVT RywNCj4gICAgICAgICogdGhlIElBQiBvciBhbnkgbWVtYmVyIHRoZXJlb2Ygb24gYmVoYWxmIG9m IHRoZSBJQUIsDQo+ICAgICAgICAqIGFueSBJRVRGIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCwgaW5jbHVkaW5nIHRo ZSBJRVRGIGxpc3QgaXRzZWxmLCBhbnkNCj53b3JraW5nDQo+ICAgICAgICAgICAgZ3JvdXAgb3Ig ZGVzaWduIHRlYW0gbGlzdCwgb3IgYW55IG90aGVyIGxpc3QgZnVuY3Rpb25pbmcNCj51bmRlciBJ RVRGDQo+ICAgICAgICAgICAgYXVzcGljZXMsDQo+ICAgICAgICAqIHRoZSBSRkMgRWRpdG9yIG9y IHRoZSBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMgZnVuY3Rpb24NCj4NCj5TdGF0ZW1lbnRzIG1hZGUgb3V0c2lk ZSBvZiBhbiBJRVRGIG1lZXRpbmcsIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBvciBvdGhlcg0KPmZ1bmN0aW9uLCB0 aGF0IGFyZSBjbGVhcmx5IG5vdCBpbnRlbmRlZCB0byBiZSBpbnB1dCB0byBhbiBJRVRGDQo+YWN0 aXZpdHksIGdyb3VwIG9yIGZ1bmN0aW9uLCBhcmUgbm90IHN1YmplY3QgdG8gdGhlc2UgcHJvdmlz aW9ucy4NCj4NCj4gICANCj4qKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioq KioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKg0KPg0KPg0KPklmIHlvdSBldmVyIHdh bnQgdG8gdW5zdWJzY3JpYmUgb3IgY2hhbmdlIHlvdXIgb3B0aW9ucyAoZWcsIHN3aXRjaCB0bw0K Pm9yIGZyb20gZGlnZXN0IG1vZGUsIGNoYW5nZSB5b3VyIHBhc3N3b3JkLCBldGMuKSwgdmlzaXQg eW91cg0KPnN1YnNjcmlwdGlvbiBwYWdlIGF0Og0KPg0KPiAgaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcv bWFpbG1hbi9vcHRpb25zL21pcDYvZG9scGhpbnklNDAxMjYuY29tDQo+DQo+WW91IGNhbiBhbHNv IG1ha2Ugc3VjaCBhZGp1c3RtZW50cyB2aWEgZW1haWwgYnkgc2VuZGluZyBhIG1lc3NhZ2UgdG86 DQo+DQo+ICBNaXA2LXJlcXVlc3RAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4NCj53aXRoIHRoZSB3b3JkIGBoZWxwJyBp biB0aGUgc3ViamVjdCBvciBib2R5IChkb24ndCBpbmNsdWRlIHRoZQ0KPnF1b3RlcyksIGFuZCB5 b3Ugd2lsbCBnZXQgYmFjayBhIG1lc3NhZ2Ugd2l0aCBpbnN0cnVjdGlvbnMuDQo+DQo+WW91IG11 c3Qga25vdyB5b3VyIHBhc3N3b3JkIHRvIGNoYW5nZSB5b3VyIG9wdGlvbnMgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBj aGFuZ2luZw0KPnRoZSBwYXNzd29yZCwgaXRzZWxmKSBvciB0byB1bnN1YnNjcmliZS4gIEl0IGlz Og0KPg0KPiAgc3VuMTAzMw0KPg0KPklmIHlvdSBmb3JnZXQgeW91ciBwYXNzd29yZCwgZG9uJ3Qg d29ycnksIHlvdSB3aWxsIHJlY2VpdmUgYSBtb250aGx5DQo+cmVtaW5kZXIgdGVsbGluZyB5b3Ug d2hhdCBhbGwgeW91ciBpZXRmLm9yZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QgcGFzc3dvcmRzDQo+YXJlLCBhbmQg aG93IHRvIHVuc3Vic2NyaWJlIG9yIGNoYW5nZSB5b3VyIG9wdGlvbnMuICBUaGVyZSBpcyBhbHNv IGENCj5idXR0b24gb24geW91ciBvcHRpb25zIHBhZ2UgdGhhdCB3aWxsIGVtYWlsIHlvdXIgY3Vy cmVudCBwYXNzd29yZCB0bw0KPnlvdS4NCj4NCj5Zb3UgbWF5IGFsc28gaGF2ZSB5b3VyIHBhc3N3 b3JkIG1haWxlZCB0byB5b3UgYXV0b21hdGljYWxseSBvZmYgb2YgdGhlDQo+V2ViIHBhZ2Ugbm90 ZWQgYWJvdmUuDQo+DQoNCj0gPSA9ID0gPSA9ID0gPSA9ID0gPSA9ID0gPSA9ID0gPSA9ID0gPQ0K CQkJDQoNCiANCgkJCQkgDQpkb2xwaGlueQ0KMjAwNC0wNS0xMA0KDQo= _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 10:28:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07802 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:28:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNBge-0000tz-Md for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:23:25 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AENKaN003468 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:23:20 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNBac-0007ZD-06 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:17:06 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06726 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:17:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNBaZ-0002TY-SG for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:17:03 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNBZU-00027v-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:15:57 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNBZ1-0001oC-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:15:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNBRq-00047S-Tx; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:08:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNBKu-0008RA-4H for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:00:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA04522 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:00:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNBKs-0004XT-2W for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:00:50 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNBK3-0004BZ-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:00:00 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNBJG-0003oK-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 09:59:10 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423A68983A; Mon, 10 May 2004 16:59:03 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <409F89DA.4080705@kolumbus.fi> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 16:55:38 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yukiyo Akisada Cc: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com, mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> <20040510140431.4a588024.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> In-Reply-To: <20040510140431.4a588024.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yukiyo Akisada wrote: > Hi, Jari and Vijay. > > I have some comments about issue 327. > > On Mon, 10 May 2004 00:33:14 +0300 > Jari Arkko wrote: > > >>>2 - HA can skip checking the source address on the outer >>> tunnel if packet is protected by IPsec. for all other >>> tunneled packets, the HA MUST verify the source address >>> on the outer tunnel against the CoA in the binding cache >>> entry. >> >>Right. Do you have suggested text? Do we need text? > > > For me, I need the text. > > At least I was confusing about this behavior > when developping the conformance test. > > Especially, the last paragraph in section 10.4.5 should be more clear. > Vijay's sentence makes me clear. Ok. I suggest adding the following text to the end of 10.4.5: This check is not necessary if the tunnel packet is accompanied by a valid ESP header. >>>4 - this just needs a clarification. if the MN is not >>> including a Home Address Option in a de-registration >>> BU from the home link, it MUST set the lifetime to 0. >>> if the lifetime is 0, it is always a de-registration BU. >> >>Yes. Need for text change? > > > I also need the text change about this. > It also confused me. I have taken another look at the text. Section 11.5.4, Returning Home, says this (my emphasis): A mobile node detects that it has returned to its home link through the movement detection algorithm in use (Section 11.5.1), when the mobile node detects that its home subnet prefix is again on-link. The mobile node SHOULD then send a Binding Update to its home agent, to instruct its home agent to no longer intercept or tunnel packets for it. In this home registration, the mobile node MUST set the Acknowledge (A) and Home Registration (H) bits, set the *Lifetime field to zero*, and set the care-of address for the binding to the mobile node's own home address. The mobile node MUST use its *home address as the source address* in the Binding Update. Section 11.7.1 (sending bus) says this: o The *packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option*, giving the mobile node's home address for the binding. o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home address and the care-of address specified for the binding. Section 10.3.1 (reg), says this: o A *Home Address destination option MUST be present* in the message. Section 10.3.2 (de-reg), says this: A Binding Update is validated and authorized in the manner described in the previous section. Section 9.5.1 (recv bu), says this: o If the Lifetime specified in the Binding Update is nonzero *and* the specified care-of address is not equal to the home address for the binding, then this is a request to cache a binding for the home address. If the Home Registration (H) bit is set in the Binding Update, the Binding Update is processed according to the procedure specified in Section 10.3.1; otherwise, it is processed according to the procedure specified in Section 9.5.2. o If the Lifetime specified in the Binding Update is zero *or* the specified care-of address matches the home address for the binding, then this is a request to delete the cached binding for the home address. In this case, the Binding Update MUST include a valid home nonce index, and the care-of nonce index MUST be ignored by the correspondent node. The generation of the binding management key depends then exclusively on the home keygen token (Section 5.2.5). If the Home Registration (H) bit is set in the Binding Update, the Binding Update is processed according to the procedure specified in Section 10.3.2; otherwise, it is processed according to the procedure specified in Section 9.5.3. I think all the above is actually pretty clear. You need to know if you are doing a reg or a de-reg. Then we have the following cases: REG - SENDER: HAO is mandatory, coa!=hoa, and lifetime!=0 RECEIVER: HAO is mandatory, coa!=hoa, and lifetime!=0 DE-REG - SENDER: HAO is optional, coa=hoa, and lifetime=0 RECEIVER: HAO is optional, coa=hoa or lifetime=0 The only things that you can't find from the text are: - For a registration, the lifetime must be non-zero (and not just smaller than the address lifetime). - For a de-registration, Section 10.3.2 refers to 10.3.1 for the validation rules, which include "MUST have HAO". This relates to issue 332 as well (another e-mail). I suggest that the two items be fixed as follows: o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home address and the care-of address specified for the binding. => o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be non-zero and less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home address and the care-of address specified for the binding. and A Binding Update is validated and authorized in the manner described in the previous section. => A Binding Update is validated and authorized in the manner described in the previous section, except that the use of the Home Address destination option is not required. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 11:02:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA09728 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 11:02:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNCDU-0006Jj-4l for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:57:16 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AEvGKJ024284 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:57:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNC6J-0004qn-UV for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:49:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA08975 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:49:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNC6H-0006HU-HO for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:49:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNC5K-0005wg-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:48:50 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNC4P-0005d6-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:47:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNBxl-0003zR-CS; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:41:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNBmD-00026q-Td for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:29:05 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07879 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:29:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNBmB-000700-KU for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:29:03 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNBlL-0006eR-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:28:12 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNBke-0006J7-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:27:28 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFC158983D; Mon, 10 May 2004 17:00:43 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <409F8A3F.8060508@kolumbus.fi> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 16:57:19 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com, mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: Issue 332 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts) References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> <409EA37C.1020201@kolumbus.fi> In-Reply-To: <409EA37C.1020201@kolumbus.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jari Arkko wrote: > This seems clear enough. But I worry a bit that we're forgetting > something; I can't remember why text was written the way it is. Indeed. After thinking about this again the change would break things. Right now, we have separated registrations and de-registrations to different sections, and that's why 10.3.1 and 11.7.1 require the HAO. Section 10.3.2 should not require it however. See also what I proposed for the Connecthathon issues. So I take my #332 text proposal back and instead suggest that we replace in Section 11.7.1 the following: The mobile node MUST use its home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding Updates sent to the home agent. with The mobile node MUST use its home address in Binding Updates sent to the home agent. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 13:31:16 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18722 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:31:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNEaG-0001op-Kq for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:29:05 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AHSuQ2006991 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:28:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNETb-00018q-7g for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:22:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18313 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:22:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNETZ-0004O6-DV for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:22:01 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNESg-00043u-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:21:07 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNERy-0003jY-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:20:22 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNEPh-0000Vn-76; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:18:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNEHv-0007pl-NU for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:10:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17505 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:09:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNEHt-0000GM-SM for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:09:57 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNEGy-0007ii-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:09:01 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-109.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.109] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNEGJ-0007Ov-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:08:19 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 10 May 2004 13:08:17 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" Cc: , Subject: RE: Issue 332 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts) Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 10:08:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <409F8A3F.8060508@kolumbus.fi> Thread-Index: AcQ2nbIozoelG7TLT42mbITXN5qSCQAEu6qw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2004 17:08:17.0621 (UTC) FILETIME=[634B5850:01C436B1] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jari - I've read through the issue text, and I don't think we want to make any changes to draft 24 for this issue. I think that the current draft text: > The mobile node MUST use its > home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in > the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding > Updates sent > to the home agent. > is clearer and more helpful than your proposed modification: > > The mobile node MUST use its home address in Binding Updates sent > to the home agent. The current text that you propose changing is in a part of section 11.7.1 that is discussing interaction with Ipsec, it is followed by: " This is necessary in order to allow the Ipsec policies to be matched with the right home address." The current text is more general than just the topic of registering a new primary care-of address, and I think that's OK because the section header is also more general: "11.7.1 Sending Binding Updates to the Home Agent". Thanks. - Ed Remmell Treck, Inc. (formerly Elmic Systems, USA) Best of Show Winner, ESC 2003 > -----Original Message----- > From: mip6-admin@ietf.org [mailto:mip6-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Jari Arkko > Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 6:57 AM > Cc: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com; mip6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Issue 332 (Was: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to > base drafts) > > Jari Arkko wrote: > > > This seems clear enough. But I worry a bit that we're forgetting > > something; I can't remember why text was written the way it is. > > Indeed. After thinking about this again the change would > break things. Right now, we have separated registrations and > de-registrations to different sections, and that's why 10.3.1 > and 11.7.1 require the HAO. Section 10.3.2 should not require > it however. See also what I proposed for the Connecthathon issues. > > So I take my #332 text proposal back and instead suggest that > we replace in Section 11.7.1 the following: > > The mobile node MUST use its > home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in > the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding > Updates sent > to the home agent. > > with > > The mobile node MUST use its home address in Binding Updates sent > to the home agent. > > --Jari > > > _______________________________________________ > Mip6 mailing list > Mip6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 13:59:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA20287 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:59:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNF3G-0007k2-Go for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:58:54 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AHwsD8029759 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:58:54 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNF0j-0006je-UH for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:56:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA20080 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:56:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNF0h-0000Zx-Mq for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:56:15 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNEzo-0000Ea-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:55:21 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNEys-0007gN-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:54:22 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNEsj-00056k-60; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:48:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNEmx-0004DM-St for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:42:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA19300 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:42:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNEmv-0003XB-Oq for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:42:01 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNElz-0003CM-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:41:04 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-98.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.98] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNEl4-0002rT-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 13:40:07 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 10 May 2004 13:40:06 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "Mip6" Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 10:40:05 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcQ2tdSNMZ0ut+nwRvKXZj6hIbKq3w== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2004 17:40:06.0713 (UTC) FILETIME=[D533AA90:01C436B5] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] Issue 331, what is the final text? Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I wanted to check the change for issue 331, but the latest draft text isn't available online. The version online still has: "The mobile node MUST ensure that its primary care-of address always has a prefix that is considered on-link by its current default router, i.e., advertised by its current default router in a solicited Router Advertisement." If you change this to: "The mobile node MUST ensure that its primary care-of address always has a prefix that is advertised by its current default router." Then I'm OK with that change. Thanks. - Ed Remmell Treck, Inc. (formerly Elmic Systems, USA) Best of Show Winner, ESC 2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 14:44:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA23623 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:44:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFjW-0000JG-91 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:42:34 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AIgY0c001185 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:42:34 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFV3-0005ap-Ol for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:27:37 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22345 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:27:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNFV0-0003o6-Vn for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:27:35 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFU0-0003Ps-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:26:32 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFTB-000314-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:25:41 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFMk-00043a-0n; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:19:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFKq-0003cJ-PL for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:17:05 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21402 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:17:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNFKo-00000G-9k for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:17:02 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFJq-0007Ql-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:16:03 -0400 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFIs-0006ko-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:15:02 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i4AIEOQ06723; Mon, 10 May 2004 11:14:24 -0700 X-mProtect: <200405101814> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from manisht.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.40, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdMR20mm; Mon, 10 May 2004 11:14:22 PDT Message-ID: <409FC6C6.4000308@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 11:15:34 -0700 From: Vijay Devarapalli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jari Arkko CC: Yukiyo Akisada , mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> <20040510140431.4a588024.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> <409F89DA.4080705@kolumbus.fi> In-Reply-To: <409F89DA.4080705@kolumbus.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jari Arkko wrote: >>>> 2 - HA can skip checking the source address on the outer >>>> tunnel if packet is protected by IPsec. for all other >>>> tunneled packets, the HA MUST verify the source address >>>> on the outer tunnel against the CoA in the binding cache >>>> entry. >>> >>> >>> Right. Do you have suggested text? Do we need text? >> >> >> >> For me, I need the text. >> >> At least I was confusing about this behavior >> when developping the conformance test. >> >> Especially, the last paragraph in section 10.4.5 should be more clear. >> Vijay's sentence makes me clear. > > > Ok. > > I suggest adding the following text to the end of 10.4.5: > > This check is not necessary if the tunnel packet is > accompanied by a valid ESP header. we probably should make it more explicit by saying This check is not necessary if the reverse-tunneled packet is protected by ESP in tunnel mode. Vijay _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 14:44:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA23704 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:44:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFjq-0000PT-Rs for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:42:55 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AIgsPG001570 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:42:54 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFdT-00075G-1o for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:36:19 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22856 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:36:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNFdQ-0006qn-IB for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:36:16 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFcQ-0006UB-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:35:14 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFbc-00068a-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:34:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFUU-0005Rx-Ue; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:27:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFNh-0004C7-S7 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:20:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21651 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:19:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNFNf-000188-9T for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:19:59 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFMg-0000lE-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:18:59 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-109.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.109] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFLh-0000NM-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:17:57 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 10 May 2004 14:17:56 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" , Cc: Subject: RE: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 11:17:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> Thread-Index: AcQ2DrZZ/FEp4VDEQlW6bv5gygl//QAq2cpw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2004 18:17:56.0184 (UTC) FILETIME=[1DE97580:01C436BB] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Some comments below about proposed issue #327 changes: > > 3 - it is not clear to me why the MN is reverse tunneling > > the HoTi message from the home link. I was at > > Connectathon, but dont remember the discussion. :( > > > > I remember now. the MN sends a de-registration BU from the > > home link, and wants to send a HoTi message from the home > > link immediately. if the HA deletes the SPD entries when it > > deletes the binding cache entry, a reverse tunneled HoTi > > message could get dropped. it was suggested the Home Agent > > keep the SPD entries alive for a short while before deleting > > the SPD entries. > > > > or the MN could wait for the binding ack to come back when > > de-registering from the home link and then send a direct HoTi > > message (not reverse tunneled) to the CN. > > I like the latter approach better. Is there a need to change text? This is tricky when the MN is deregistering when on a foreign link. In this case, there is no clear guidance in the draft about how to support simultaneous MN deregistration of CN RO bindings and MN deregistration with the home agent. The former approach (HA keeps SPD entries alive for some short time after MN deregistration) described above would support this, without requiring changes on the MN. In our MN, when we deregister on a foreign link we do something tricky to handle this scenario: when we still have CN RO bindings to deregister, our deregistration binding update to the home agent is actually a registration binding update with a very short lifetime (so it will expire soon, but it gives us enough time to complete our deregistration with the home agent). This allows us to continue to use the tunnel through the home agent to tunnel the HoTI and CoTI messages to CNs that we deregister RO bindings with. Thanks. - Ed --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 10 15:20:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA27007 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:20:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNGEK-0006DI-GU for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:14:29 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4AJEOX8023871 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:14:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNG6B-0001Bt-9L for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:05:59 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA25233 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:05:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNG68-0001rp-Cq for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:05:56 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNG5G-0001Xi-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:05:03 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNG4O-0001CP-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 15:04:08 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFxX-0002VA-HG; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:57:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNFo2-0001E9-LC for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:47:14 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA23946 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:47:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNFnz-0003Ar-Sy for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:47:11 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFn5-0002ph-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:46:15 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-98.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.98] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNFmY-0002Uq-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:45:42 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 10 May 2004 14:45:42 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" , Cc: Subject: RE: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 11:45:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcQ2DrZZ/FEp4VDEQlW6bv5gygl//QAq2cpwAAExvkA= X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2004 18:45:42.0380 (UTC) FILETIME=[FF0ACAC0:01C436BE] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > In our MN, when we deregister on a foreign link we do > something tricky to handle this scenario: when we still have > CN RO bindings to deregister, our deregistration binding > update to the home agent is actually a registration binding > update with a very short lifetime (so it will expire soon, > but it gives us enough time to complete our deregistration > with the home agent). Meant to type: (so it will expire soon, but it gives us enough time to complete our deregistration of CN RO bindings). - Ed --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue May 11 10:47:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA00773 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:47:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNYU8-0001Sv-Cr for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:44:00 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4BEhuPo005633 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:43:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNYGs-0006y5-RR for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:30:15 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29594 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:30:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNYGq-0005Ua-JU for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:30:12 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNYFw-00054m-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:29:17 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNYF5-0004ez-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:28:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNY9u-0005Hg-RD; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:23:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNXz5-000841-F6 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:11:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA27867 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:11:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNXz3-0005nT-BT for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:11:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNXy3-0005P9-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:10:48 -0400 Received: from mail-dub.microsoft.com ([213.199.128.160]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNXww-0004ec-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 10:09:38 -0400 Received: from dub-imc-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.196.22]) by mail-dub.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 11 May 2004 15:09:07 +0100 Received: from 65.53.196.22 by dub-imc-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 11 May 2004 15:09:07 +0100 Received: from EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.192.43]) by dub-imc-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 11 May 2004 15:09:07 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 15:09:06 +0100 Message-ID: <579E83556A36E44EB2945CCE990B31740155CBFC@EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com> Thread-Topic: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts Thread-Index: AcQ2DrZZ/FEp4VDEQlW6bv5gygl//QAq2cpwAAExvkAAKI+58A== From: "Greg O'Shea" To: "Ed Remmell" , "Jari Arkko" , Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 May 2004 14:09:07.0001 (UTC) FILETIME=[85D6AA90:01C43761] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FWIW we send HAO in BU to HA when we return home. It is allowed in draft 24 - please do not make any changes that disallow it.=20 -----Original Message----- From: mip6-admin@ietf.org [mailto:mip6-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ed Remmell Sent: 10 May 2004 19:46 To: 'Jari Arkko'; Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Mip6] Re: final edits to base drafts > In our MN, when we deregister on a foreign link we do=20 > something tricky to handle this scenario: when we still have=20 > CN RO bindings to deregister, our deregistration binding=20 > update to the home agent is actually a registration binding=20 > update with a very short lifetime (so it will expire soon,=20 > but it gives us enough time to complete our deregistration=20 > with the home agent). Meant to type: (so it will expire soon, but it gives us enough time to complete our deregistration of CN RO bindings). - Ed --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 =20 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue May 11 22:36:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14803 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:36:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjXW-0001JB-Mr for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:32:12 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4C2WAh3005029 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:32:10 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjTs-0000WK-B1 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:28:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14409 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:28:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNjTp-0000UT-4G for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:28:21 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjSp-00002Z-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:27:20 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjRh-00071E-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:26:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjLm-0007P4-29; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:20:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjDS-0006LV-MS for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:11:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13903 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:11:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNjDP-0000wo-Iu for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:11:23 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjCQ-0000Wj-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:10:23 -0400 Received: from ns.64translator.com ([202.214.123.16] helo=mail.64translator.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjBm-0007Vc-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:09:43 -0400 Received: from bahamas.64translator.com ([10.21.32.3]) by mail.64translator.com (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4C286AN063135; Wed, 12 May 2004 11:08:06 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com) Received: from localhost (dhcp165.64translator.com [10.21.32.165]) by bahamas.64translator.com (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with SMTP id i4C285uJ020245; Wed, 12 May 2004 11:08:06 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com) Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 11:08:03 +0900 From: Yukiyo Akisada To: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi, Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com Cc: mip6@ietf.org Message-Id: <20040512110803.22900178.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> In-Reply-To: <409F89DA.4080705@kolumbus.fi> References: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B510D777@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> <409EA39A.2070808@kolumbus.fi> <20040510140431.4a588024.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> <409F89DA.4080705@kolumbus.fi> Organization: Yokogawa Electric Corporation X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.3 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] issue 327 #4 Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Jari and Vijay. On Mon, 10 May 2004 16:55:38 +0300 Jari Arkko wrote: > >>>4 - this just needs a clarification. if the MN is not > >>> including a Home Address Option in a de-registration > >>> BU from the home link, it MUST set the lifetime to 0. > >>> if the lifetime is 0, it is always a de-registration BU. (snip) > I think all the above is actually pretty clear. You need to know > if you are doing a reg or a de-reg. Then we have the following cases: > > REG - SENDER: HAO is mandatory, coa!=hoa, and lifetime!=0 > RECEIVER: HAO is mandatory, coa!=hoa, and lifetime!=0 > > DE-REG - SENDER: HAO is optional, coa=hoa, and lifetime=0 > RECEIVER: HAO is optional, coa=hoa or lifetime=0 In the result, BU (lifetime!=0) w/o HaO means DE-REG for receiver, right? In my memory, at the last Connectathon, Vijay said that the receiver also requires 'coa=hoa and lifetime=0' for de-registraion. # In this case, the receiver was HA. If the receiver disallows to receive BU (lifetime!=0) w/o HaO for de-registraion, we need text change. Which is the correct way? I'm still confusing. Thanks. ---- Yukiyo Akisada _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue May 11 22:43:59 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15314 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:43:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjeg-0002iG-Uw for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:39:35 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4C2dYIO010421 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:39:34 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjav-0001pP-Ac for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:35:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14718 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:35:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNjas-0003Yu-4K for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:35:38 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjZr-00037d-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:34:35 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjZB-0002gX-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:33:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjUT-0000kV-Mi; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:29:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNjOB-0007vt-6y for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:22:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14163 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:22:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNjO8-0005fl-1R for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:22:28 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjNF-0005Dq-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:21:33 -0400 Received: from mgw-x4.nokia.com ([131.228.20.27]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNjMH-0004lR-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 11 May 2004 22:20:33 -0400 Received: from esdks004.ntc.nokia.com (esdks004.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.159]) by mgw-x4.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i4C2KWv11524; Wed, 12 May 2004 05:20:32 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Wed, 12 May 2004 05:20:27 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.30 2004040916 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks004.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i4C2KREv009280; Wed, 12 May 2004 05:20:27 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks004.ntc.nokia.com 00YLxr5E; Wed, 12 May 2004 05:20:24 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i4C2KNH19675; Wed, 12 May 2004 05:20:23 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from mvebe001.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.18.140.37]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Tue, 11 May 2004 21:20:22 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 19:20:21 -0700 Message-ID: <95C69691E3067248918990C7214854B50D578B@mvebe001.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: issue 327 #4 Thread-Index: AcQ3xm2pEPvMbd2uTA67Wg5PPTI6bgAAKCtg To: , Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2004 02:20:22.0420 (UTC) FILETIME=[ADA04D40:01C437C7] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 #4 Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Yukiyo Akisada [mailto:Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 7:08 PM > To: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi; Devarapalli Vijay (Nokia-NRC/MtView) > Cc: mip6@ietf.org > Subject: issue 327 #4 >=20 >=20 > Hi, Jari and Vijay. >=20 > On Mon, 10 May 2004 16:55:38 +0300 > Jari Arkko wrote: >=20 > > >>>4 - this just needs a clarification. if the MN is not =20 > > >>> including a Home Address Option in a de-registration > > >>> BU from the home link, it MUST set the lifetime to 0. > > >>> if the lifetime is 0, it is always a de-registration BU. >=20 > (snip) >=20 > > I think all the above is actually pretty clear. You need to know > > if you are doing a reg or a de-reg. Then we have the=20 > following cases: > >=20 > > REG - SENDER: HAO is mandatory, coa!=3Dhoa, and lifetime!=3D0 > > RECEIVER: HAO is mandatory, coa!=3Dhoa, and lifetime!=3D0 > >=20 > > DE-REG - SENDER: HAO is optional, coa=3Dhoa, and lifetime=3D0 > > RECEIVER: HAO is optional, coa=3Dhoa or lifetime=3D0 >=20 > In the result, > BU (lifetime!=3D0) w/o HaO means DE-REG for receiver, right? >=20 > In my memory,=20 > at the last Connectathon, > Vijay said that the receiver also requires 'coa=3Dhoa and=20 > lifetime=3D0' for de-registraion. > # In this case, the receiver was HA. I think I said if the Home Address option is present and home address is equal to care-of, then it means de-registration to the receiver irrespective of what the lifetime field is. if the lifetime is 0, it always means de-registration. >=20 > If the receiver disallows to receive BU (lifetime!=3D0) w/o HaO=20 > for de-registraion, > we need text change. this should be disallowed.=20 Vijay _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:07:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27168 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:07:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxAL-0003LJ-JT for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:05:10 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CH59gJ012774 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:05:09 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNwuY-0006de-Rl for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:48:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25893 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:48:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNwuX-0006Bb-81 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:48:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNwtf-0005gS-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:47:56 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNwsx-0005AX-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:47:11 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNwmF-000313-4L; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:40:15 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNwX9-0004We-63 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:24:39 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA23210 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:24:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNwX7-0002Ub-NM for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:24:37 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNwWI-0001yY-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:23:47 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNwV0-0000wK-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:22:26 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D028984A for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 19:22:19 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A24E6E.9010500@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 19:18:54 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] final edits - status Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think we have an agreement on everything else except #327. I'll deal with that in another e-mail, but here are the others: http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/MIPv6-Issues.html --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:29:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28166 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:29:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxM1-0006TD-MS for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:17:14 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHHDsp024866 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:17:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxGj-0005Z1-2H for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:11:45 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27455 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:11:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxGh-0002KT-82 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:11:43 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxFl-0001q7-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:10:45 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxFB-0001LO-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:10:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxBH-0003la-1V; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:06:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNx2B-0008Ed-6f for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:56:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26231 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:56:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNx29-0002PY-FA for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:56:41 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNx1A-0001uz-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:55:41 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNx0N-0001Qh-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:54:51 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5B968984A; Wed, 12 May 2004 19:54:50 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A2560D.9000003@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 19:51:25 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org, mroe@microsoft.com Cc: eremmell@treck.com, Vijay Devarapalli , Brian Haley , Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think we had agreement on this part, except that you Mike commented: > (a) Computation of authentication data when MN deregisters from a foreign link. > > You proposed: > > Mobility Data = care-of address | correspondent | MH Data > Authenticator = First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, Mobility Data)) > > Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the > care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node > if the Binding Update succeeds. Note that this address > might be different from the source address of the Binding Update > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. > > This still isn't very clear. I take it that "Care-of address" > is meant to be the home address (not the CoA) when the lifetime > of the binding is zero? Yes. Maybe: Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node if the Binding Update succeeds, or the home address of the mobile node if this option is used in de-registration. Note also that this address might be different from the source address of the Binding Update message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. I think this falls into the category of a clarification rather than a technical change. If people can agree to this, I can notify the RFC editor. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:29:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28184 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:29:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxWp-00018P-H8 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:28:23 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHSNLE004354 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:28:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxIa-0005tO-80 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:13:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27546 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:13:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxIY-0003KG-DN for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:13:38 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxHf-0002pv-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:12:44 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxGp-0002LN-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:11:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxBK-0003lw-IW; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:06:10 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNx4D-0000Co-G0 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:58:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26425 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:58:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNx4B-0003SO-MJ for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:58:47 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNx3M-0002xU-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:57:57 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNx2d-0002Rx-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:57:11 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031CB8984A; Wed, 12 May 2004 19:57:11 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A2569A.5080703@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 19:53:46 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org, Vijay Devarapalli Cc: mroe@microsoft.com, eremmell@treck.com, Brian Haley , Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] issue 327 part 2 status -- need not check the tunnel src if using ESP Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think we have an agreement on this one. Suggested text is: This check is not necessary if the reverse-tunneled packet is protected by ESP in tunnel mode. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:51:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29535 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:51:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxp2-0007gt-00 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:12 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHlBqY029559 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxgG-000497-VB for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:38:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28779 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:38:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxgE-0000Di-Tt for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:38:07 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxfK-0007Un-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:37:11 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxeT-0006wB-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:36:17 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxXR-0001XM-Lu; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:29:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxHX-0005oY-2S for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:12:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27492 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:12:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxHV-0002oN-74 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:12:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxGU-0002J0-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:11:30 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxFS-0001h5-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:10:26 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0842F8984A; Wed, 12 May 2004 20:10:26 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A259B4.1060109@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 20:07:00 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org, mroe@microsoft.com, eremmell@treck.com, Vijay Devarapalli , Brian Haley Cc: Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit By the way, I have re-organized the issue file for #327, so everyone will be able to track the invidual parts better. See http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/issues/issue327.txt And then to the part 3. I believe what Ed and others have talked about is a warning to implementers that the tunnel exists only as long as the registration exists. There was some other discussion about keeping SPD entries around, but I think we ended up not wanting to say anything about that. I think this issue is a borderline one. If we really need it, perhaps we can use this text: Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically stops operating at the same time as the registration is deleted. Is it this simple or do you want more? --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:52:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29577 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:52:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxp8-0007kX-2c for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:18 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHlI4e029784 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:18 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxjb-0005x3-Rs for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:41:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28924 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:41:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxjZ-0002Dd-Rc for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:41:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxib-0001gi-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:40:34 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxhR-0000oG-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:39:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxXX-0001cE-Qo; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:29:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxMZ-0006XD-LS for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:17:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27733 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:17:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxMX-0005QE-LL for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:17:45 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxLf-0004uX-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:16:52 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxKi-00043Y-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:15:52 -0400 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2004 09:19:49 +0000 Received: from mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com [171.71.163.14]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4CHFIC3022374 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 10:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cisco.com (dhcp-128-107-163-245.cisco.com [128.107.163.245]) by mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.5-GR) with ESMTP id ATC64279; Wed, 12 May 2004 10:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <40A25BC0.5080905@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 10:15:44 -0700 From: Alpesh User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] [Fwd: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option] Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wondering if we can incorporate some text clarifying the behavior/interpretation of the binding refresh advice option? The current version of the draft lacks clarification regarding its usage. Rgds Alpesh -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 08:55:08 -0700 From: Kent Leung To: Alpesh Patel CC: Jari Arkko , Jari Arkko , chaliep@iprg.nokia.com References: <4074DBBD.5080207@cisco.com> <4074F683.6040704@kolumbus.fi> I think Jari said that HA is not restricting but only recommending MN to refresh the binding. How about this? "... how long after receiving the Binding Ack that the mobile node SHOULD send a new home registration to the home agent." Kent At 07:14 AM 4/8/2004 -0700, Alpesh Patel wrote: >Jari - > >So, does that mean that the HA is "restricting" the binding lifetime than >requested in the BU? > >Don't sound like that from the 2nd comment? > >-a > >Jari Arkko wrote: >>Alpesh Patel wrote: >> >>>Jari - >>> >>>Seeking clarification on the Binding Refresh Advice option - quoting 6.2.4, >>> >>> The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding >>> Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the >>> mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The >>> Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates >>> how long before the mobile node SHOULD send a new home registration >>> to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a >>> smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding >>> Acknowledgement. >>> >>>Guess the text should have said "how long before <>>registration>> the mobile node SHOULD send a new home reg..." >>> >>>wondering if the text << >> should have been added (or something similar?) >> >>I think it means difference from CURRENT TIME, not difference >>from EXPIRY TIME. I agree that text might have been clearer. >>How about "... indicates remaining time until the mobile node ..."? >> >>>What if the Mobile does not register within this time? What should the >>>HA do? >> >>Nothing. Its advice. >>--Jari >> > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:52:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29602 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:52:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxp9-0007lI-5t for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:19 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHlJsl029828 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:19 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxkh-00060W-Gr for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:42:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28995 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:42:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxkf-0002k0-Fd for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:42:41 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxjZ-0002Di-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:41:34 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxic-0001gs-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:40:34 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxXc-0001gF-Pi; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:29:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxOO-00074r-Lg for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:19:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27809 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:19:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxOM-0006Pv-OF for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:19:38 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxNU-0005w0-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:18:45 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-98.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.98] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxMv-0005Rw-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:18:09 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 12 May 2004 13:18:08 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" , , Cc: "'Vijay Devarapalli'" , "'Brian Haley'" , , Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 10:18:05 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Thread-Index: AcQ4QddW+Rs6rDjrQaWJTta4D0v5CAAAzRgA In-Reply-To: <40A2560D.9000003@kolumbus.fi> Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2004 17:18:08.0545 (UTC) FILETIME=[1856B110:01C43845] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Looks good to me. Thanks. - Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 9:51 AM > To: mip6@ietf.org; mroe@microsoft.com > Cc: eremmell@treck.com; Vijay Devarapalli; Brian Haley; > Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; gregos@microsoft.com > Subject: issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification > > I think we had agreement on this part, except that you Mike > commented: > > > (a) Computation of authentication data when MN > deregisters from a foreign link. > > > > You proposed: > > > > Mobility Data = care-of address | correspondent | MH Data > > Authenticator = First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, Mobility Data)) > > > > Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the > > care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node > > if the Binding Update succeeds. Note that this address > > might be different from the source address of the Binding Update > > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. > > > > This still isn't very clear. I take it that "Care-of address" > > is meant to be the home address (not the CoA) when > the lifetime > > of the binding is zero? > > Yes. Maybe: > > Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the > care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node > if the Binding Update succeeds, or the home address of the > mobile node if this option is used in de-registration. > Note also that > this address might be different from the source address > of the Binding Update > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. > > I think this falls into the category of a clarification > rather than a technical change. If people can agree to this, > I can notify the RFC editor. > > --Jari > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:52:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29619 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:52:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxpZ-0007mU-OU for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:45 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHlj80029903 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:45 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxkz-000641-5H for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:43:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29041 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:42:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxkx-0002li-0i for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:42:59 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxjt-0002GV-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:41:53 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxj8-0001kp-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:41:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxXe-0001iY-Mg; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:29:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxRG-0007nz-0O for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:22:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27877 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:22:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxRD-000071-W7 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:22:36 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxQB-0007Ok-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:21:32 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-98.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.98] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxP2-0006X5-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:20:20 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 12 May 2004 13:20:19 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" , , , "'Vijay Devarapalli'" , "'Brian Haley'" Cc: , Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 10:20:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Thread-Index: AcQ4RAU8M64UlRRnROa0CclyGTGw2QAATybw In-Reply-To: <40A259B4.1060109@kolumbus.fi> Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2004 17:20:20.0098 (UTC) FILETIME=[66C01620:01C43845] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "registration" -> "home registration" "Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically stops operating at the same time as the *home* registration is deleted." Good enough for me. Thanks. - Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 10:07 AM > To: mip6@ietf.org; mroe@microsoft.com; eremmell@treck.com; > Vijay Devarapalli; Brian Haley > Cc: Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; gregos@microsoft.com > Subject: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff > > > By the way, I have re-organized the issue file for #327, so > everyone will be able to track the invidual parts better. See > > http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/issues/issue327.txt > > And then to the part 3. I believe what Ed and others have > talked about is a warning to implementers that the tunnel > exists only as long as the registration exists. There was > some other discussion about keeping SPD entries around, but I > think we ended up not wanting to say anything about that. > > I think this issue is a borderline one. If we really need it, > perhaps we can use this text: > > Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically > stops operating at the same time as the registration > is deleted. > > Is it this simple or do you want more? > > --Jari > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:57:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29995 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:57:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxsr-0000IQ-Dv for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:51:09 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHp9IT001133 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:51:09 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxoX-0007KV-0P for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:46:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29214 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:46:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxoU-0004md-Py for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:46:38 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxni-0004I8-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:45:51 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxmn-0003nh-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:44:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxYT-0001x4-1B; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:30:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxUA-0008Rj-TX for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27991 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxU8-0001cZ-U0 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:37 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxTL-00018U-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:24:48 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxSU-0000eQ-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:23:54 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94EB98984A; Wed, 12 May 2004 20:23:52 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A25CDB.4050506@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 20:20:27 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org, mroe@microsoft.com, eremmell@treck.com, Vijay Devarapalli , Brian Haley , Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Unless I'm missing something, with Ed's text for part 2, the only thing that remains for the part 4 is this: o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home address and the care-of address specified for the binding. => o The value specified in the Lifetime field MUST be non-zero and SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home address and the care-of address specified for the binding. If this is it, I think this clarification can be added. Note that the MUST is not a new requirement, all this is really implied by other parts of the spec already. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 13:59:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00194 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:59:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxyM-0002Bl-J1 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:56:50 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CHuoRR008397 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:56:50 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxqY-0007yw-59 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:48:46 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29350 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:48:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxqW-0005pt-2Z for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:48:44 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxpY-0005IQ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:47:45 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxob-0004nT-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:46:45 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxYX-0001xl-JY; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:30:09 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNxU6-0008K1-Tc for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27982 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNxU4-0001bx-UY for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:33 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxTE-00017X-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:24:41 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-98.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.98] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNxSB-0000cX-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:23:35 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 12 May 2004 13:23:35 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" , , , "'Vijay Devarapalli'" , "'Brian Haley'" Cc: , Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 10:23:33 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Thread-Index: AcQ4RAU8M64UlRRnROa0CclyGTGw2QAATybwAAAfy/A= Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2004 17:23:35.0184 (UTC) FILETIME=[DB07D900:01C43845] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "same time as" -> "same time that" "Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically stops operating at the same time *that* the home registration is deleted." - Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Remmell [mailto:eremmell@treck.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 10:20 AM > To: 'Jari Arkko'; 'mip6@ietf.org'; 'mroe@microsoft.com'; > 'Vijay Devarapalli'; 'Brian Haley' > Cc: 'Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com'; 'gregos@microsoft.com' > Subject: RE: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff > > "registration" -> "home registration" > > "Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically stops > operating at the same time as the *home* registration is deleted." > > Good enough for me. > > Thanks. > - Ed > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 10:07 AM > > To: mip6@ietf.org; mroe@microsoft.com; eremmell@treck.com; Vijay > > Devarapalli; Brian Haley > > Cc: Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; gregos@microsoft.com > > Subject: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff > > > > > > By the way, I have re-organized the issue file for #327, so > everyone > > will be able to track the invidual parts better. See > > > > http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/issues/issue327.txt > > > > And then to the part 3. I believe what Ed and others have > talked about > > is a warning to implementers that the tunnel exists only as long as > > the registration exists. There was some other discussion > about keeping > > SPD entries around, but I think we ended up not wanting to say > > anything about that. > > > > I think this issue is a borderline one. If we really need > it, perhaps > > we can use this text: > > > > Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically > > stops operating at the same time as the registration > > is deleted. > > > > Is it this simple or do you want more? > > > > --Jari > > > > --- > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 15:43:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06323 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:43:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNzXE-0003Iz-M6 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:36:57 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CJaucT012706 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:36:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNzIf-0006mu-8E for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:21:53 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA04929 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:21:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNzIe-0005xj-2m for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:21:52 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNzHS-0005QU-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:20:38 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNzGT-0004tr-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:19:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNyxW-0008LL-Mn; Wed, 12 May 2004 15:00:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNyBr-0006Bw-BZ for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 14:10:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA00815 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 14:10:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNyBm-0001dx-SO for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 14:10:42 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNyAr-00019n-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 14:09:46 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-98.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.98] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNyAI-0000fc-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 14:09:10 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 12 May 2004 14:09:09 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Jari Arkko'" , , , "'Vijay Devarapalli'" , "'Brian Haley'" , , Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 11:09:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcQ4ReWmN54gMVsuQ8+Og2y42vecDQABRdgg In-Reply-To: <40A25CDB.4050506@kolumbus.fi> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2004 18:09:10.0088 (UTC) FILETIME=[39291480:01C4384C] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Assuming that this change refers to "11.7.1 Sending Binding Updates to the Home Agent", specifically the list following "To register a care-of address or to extend the lifetime of an existing registration, the mobile node sends a packet to its home agent containing a Binding Update, with the packet constructed as follows:" then I'm OK with this change. - Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 10:20 AM > To: mip6@ietf.org; mroe@microsoft.com; eremmell@treck.com; > Vijay Devarapalli; Brian Haley; > Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; gregos@microsoft.com > Subject: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules > > > Unless I'm missing something, with Ed's text for part 2, the > only thing that remains for the part 4 is this: > > o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be > less than or > equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home > address and the > care-of address specified for the binding. > > => > > o The value specified in the Lifetime field MUST be non-zero and > SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime > of the home address and the care-of address specified for the > binding. > > If this is it, I think this clarification can be added. > Note that the MUST is not a new requirement, all this is > really implied by other parts of the spec already. > > --Jari > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 16:55:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10780 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:55:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0fj-0005sH-LT for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:50:28 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CKnlh3022575 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:49:47 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0YD-0004ET-6F for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:42:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA09973 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:41:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO0YB-0001BD-8d for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:41:59 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO0XH-0000fR-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:41:04 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO0Wd-00008r-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:40:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0Lq-0000Ss-1b; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:29:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO08u-0004of-RV for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:15:53 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08419 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:15:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO08t-0003F9-16 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:15:51 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO07w-0002k0-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:14:53 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO073-0002Cz-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:13:57 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6FD8984A; Wed, 12 May 2004 23:13:55 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A284B6.5050605@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 23:10:30 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ed Remmell Cc: mip6@ietf.org, mroe@microsoft.com, "'Vijay Devarapalli'" , "'Brian Haley'" , Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] Re: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, that was the intent. --Jari Ed Remmell wrote: > Assuming that this change refers to "11.7.1 Sending Binding Updates to the > Home Agent", specifically the list following > "To register a care-of address or to extend the lifetime of an > existing registration, the mobile node sends a packet to its home > agent containing a Binding Update, with the packet constructed as > follows:" > > then I'm OK with this change. > > - Ed > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi] >>Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 10:20 AM >>To: mip6@ietf.org; mroe@microsoft.com; eremmell@treck.com; >>Vijay Devarapalli; Brian Haley; >>Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; gregos@microsoft.com >>Subject: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules >> >> >>Unless I'm missing something, with Ed's text for part 2, the >>only thing that remains for the part 4 is this: >> >> o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be >>less than or >> equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home >>address and the >> care-of address specified for the binding. >> >>=> >> >> o The value specified in the Lifetime field MUST be non-zero and >> SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime >> of the home address and the care-of address specified for the >> binding. >> >>If this is it, I think this clarification can be added. >>Note that the MUST is not a new requirement, all this is >>really implied by other parts of the spec already. >> >>--Jari >> >>--- >>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 >> >> > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 16:55:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10799 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:55:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0j3-000700-1U for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:53:13 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4CKrCB6026898 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:53:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0a8-0004rp-Lg for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:44:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10084 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:43:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO0a6-0002JL-Mh for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:43:58 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO0Yv-0001il-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:42:46 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO0Xu-00019Q-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:41:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0Mb-0000c7-SW; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:30:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO0Fe-0006iT-Lp for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:22:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08676 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:22:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO0Fc-0006jv-TZ for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:22:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO0Ef-0006EF-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:21:50 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO0Dk-0005iN-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:20:52 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C24A38984A; Wed, 12 May 2004 23:20:51 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A28656.2080408@kolumbus.fi> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 23:17:26 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alpesh Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] [Fwd: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option] References: <40A25BC0.5080905@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <40A25BC0.5080905@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alpesh, I believe this issue is already being tracked. See http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/issues/issue324.txt Is the suggested text below acceptable to you: OLD: The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates how long before the mobile node SHOULD send a new home registration to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding Acknowledgement. NEW: The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates remaining time until the mobile node SHOULD send a new home registration to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding Acknowledgement. --Jari Alpesh wrote: > Wondering if we can incorporate some text clarifying the > behavior/interpretation of the binding > refresh advice option? The current version of the draft lacks > clarification regarding its usage. > > Rgds > Alpesh > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option > Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 08:55:08 -0700 > From: Kent Leung > To: Alpesh Patel > CC: Jari Arkko , Jari Arkko > , chaliep@iprg.nokia.com > References: <4074DBBD.5080207@cisco.com> <4074F683.6040704@kolumbus.fi> > > > > I think Jari said that HA is not restricting but only recommending MN to > refresh > the binding. > > How about this? > > "... how long after receiving the Binding Ack that the mobile node > SHOULD send > a new home registration to the home agent." > > Kent > > > At 07:14 AM 4/8/2004 -0700, Alpesh Patel wrote: > >> Jari - >> >> So, does that mean that the HA is "restricting" the binding lifetime >> than requested in the BU? >> >> Don't sound like that from the 2nd comment? >> >> -a >> >> Jari Arkko wrote: >> >>> Alpesh Patel wrote: >>> >>>> Jari - >>>> >>>> Seeking clarification on the Binding Refresh Advice option - quoting >>>> 6.2.4, >>>> >>>> The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding >>>> Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the >>>> mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The >>>> Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates >>>> how long before the mobile node SHOULD send a new home registration >>>> to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a >>>> smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding >>>> Acknowledgement. >>>> >>>> Guess the text should have said "how long before <>>registration>> >>>> the mobile node SHOULD send a new home reg..." >>>> >>>> wondering if the text << >> should have been added (or something >>>> similar?) >>> >>> >>> I think it means difference from CURRENT TIME, not difference >>> from EXPIRY TIME. I agree that text might have been clearer. >>> How about "... indicates remaining time until the mobile node ..."? >>> >>>> What if the Mobile does not register within this time? What should >>>> the HA do? >>> >>> >>> Nothing. Its advice. >>> --Jari >>> >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mip6 mailing list > Mip6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 21:22:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24500 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:22:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO4tp-0007ph-9v for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:20:37 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4D1Kb4I030109 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:20:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO4p9-0007EP-OY for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:15:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24249 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:15:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO4p7-0007ez-54 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:15:45 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO4nt-00079O-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:14:30 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO4my-0006fD-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:13:32 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO4jZ-0005qS-QY; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:10:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO4aQ-0002yd-JU for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:00:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA23451 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:00:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO4aO-0007f8-5i for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:00:32 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO4ZN-00079f-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 20:59:30 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO4Yc-0006Lg-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 20:58:42 -0400 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2004 17:04:22 +0000 Received: from mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com [171.71.163.14]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4D0wAC1028762; Wed, 12 May 2004 17:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cisco.com (dhcp-128-107-163-245.cisco.com [128.107.163.245]) by mira-sjc5-b.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.5-GR) with ESMTP id ATD13299; Wed, 12 May 2004 17:57:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <40A2C83C.2060609@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 17:58:36 -0700 From: Alpesh User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jari Arkko CC: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] [Fwd: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option] References: <40A25BC0.5080905@cisco.com> <40A28656.2080408@kolumbus.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jari - This is fine. I would suggest that we add a sentence reflecting the fact that if the mobile node does not send BU to refresh the Binding cache, HA would not do anything. The text says "SHOULD", but the first time I read this I was pondering the applicability. -a Jari Arkko wrote: > Hi Alpesh, > > I believe this issue is already being tracked. See > http://www.arkko.com/publications/mipv6/issues/issue324.txt > > Is the suggested text below acceptable to you: > > OLD: > The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding > Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the > mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The > Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates > how long before the mobile node SHOULD send a new home registration > to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a > smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding > Acknowledgement. > NEW: > The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding > Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the > mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The > Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates > remaining time until the mobile node SHOULD send a new home > registration > to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a > smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding > Acknowledgement. > > --Jari > > Alpesh wrote: > >> Wondering if we can incorporate some text clarifying the >> behavior/interpretation of the binding >> refresh advice option? The current version of the draft lacks >> clarification regarding its usage. >> >> Rgds >> Alpesh >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option >> Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 08:55:08 -0700 >> From: Kent Leung >> To: Alpesh Patel >> CC: Jari Arkko , Jari Arkko >> , chaliep@iprg.nokia.com >> References: <4074DBBD.5080207@cisco.com> <4074F683.6040704@kolumbus.fi> >> >> >> >> I think Jari said that HA is not restricting but only recommending MN >> to refresh >> the binding. >> >> How about this? >> >> "... how long after receiving the Binding Ack that the mobile node >> SHOULD send >> a new home registration to the home agent." >> >> Kent >> >> >> At 07:14 AM 4/8/2004 -0700, Alpesh Patel wrote: >> >>> Jari - >>> >>> So, does that mean that the HA is "restricting" the binding lifetime >>> than requested in the BU? >>> >>> Don't sound like that from the 2nd comment? >>> >>> -a >>> >>> Jari Arkko wrote: >>> >>>> Alpesh Patel wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jari - >>>>> >>>>> Seeking clarification on the Binding Refresh Advice option - >>>>> quoting 6.2.4, >>>>> >>>>> The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding >>>>> Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from >>>>> the >>>>> mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The >>>>> Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and >>>>> indicates >>>>> how long before the mobile node SHOULD send a new home >>>>> registration >>>>> to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to indicate a >>>>> smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the Binding >>>>> Acknowledgement. >>>>> >>>>> Guess the text should have said "how long before <>>registration>> >>>>> the mobile node SHOULD send a new home reg..." >>>>> >>>>> wondering if the text << >> should have been added (or something >>>>> similar?) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I think it means difference from CURRENT TIME, not difference >>>> from EXPIRY TIME. I agree that text might have been clearer. >>>> How about "... indicates remaining time until the mobile node ..."? >>>> >>>>> What if the Mobile does not register within this time? What should >>>>> the HA do? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Nothing. Its advice. >>>> --Jari >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mip6 mailing list >> Mip6@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 >> > > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 12 22:19:00 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA26980 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 22:19:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO5j2-0002dX-I7 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 22:13:33 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4D2DWiH010131 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 22:13:32 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO5WS-0000Ft-Fd for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 22:00:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA26285 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 22:00:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO5WP-0007Bq-EH for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 22:00:29 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO5VO-0006ey-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:59:27 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO5UF-0005qQ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:58:15 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO5RA-0007RO-Pt; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:55:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BO5Mu-0006Pd-8y for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:50:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA25847 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:50:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BO5Mr-00029J-C3 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:50:37 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BO5M2-0001ec-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:49:46 -0400 Received: from ns.64translator.com ([202.214.123.16] helo=mail.64translator.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BO5LI-000175-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 21:49:01 -0400 Received: from bahamas.64translator.com ([10.21.32.3]) by mail.64translator.com (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4D1kKAN068602; Thu, 13 May 2004 10:46:40 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com) Received: from localhost (dhcp165.64translator.com [10.21.32.165]) by bahamas.64translator.com (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with SMTP id i4D1kIuJ072374; Thu, 13 May 2004 10:46:18 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com) Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 10:46:15 +0900 From: Yukiyo Akisada To: Jari Arkko Cc: mip6@ietf.org, vijayd@IPRG.nokia.com, mroe@microsoft.com, eremmell@treck.com, Brian.Haley@hp.com, gregos@microsoft.com Message-Id: <20040513104615.7f490cf4.Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com> In-Reply-To: <40A2569A.5080703@kolumbus.fi> References: <40A2569A.5080703@kolumbus.fi> Organization: Yokogawa Electric Corporation X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.3 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mip6] Re: issue 327 part 2 status -- need not check the tunnel src if using ESP Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 12 May 2004 19:53:46 +0300 Jari Arkko wrote: > I think we have an agreement on this one. > Suggested text is: > > This check is not necessary if the reverse-tunneled packet > is protected by ESP in tunnel mode. It looks fine for me. Thanks. ---- Yukiyo Akisada _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 14 12:22:03 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA00595 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 12:22:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOf8a-00079j-Nc for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 12:02:17 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4EG2GNL027503 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 12:02:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOf4a-0006Qf-PF for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:58:08 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29145 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:58:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOf4Z-0002F8-JU for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:58:07 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOf3e-0001la-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:57:11 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOf30-0001IB-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:56:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOetq-0003bA-8K; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:47:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOesz-0003RS-UT for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:46:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28594 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:46:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOesy-00042i-JB for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:46:08 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOerw-0003WM-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:45:04 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOeqo-0002hi-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:43:54 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FF489877; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:43:52 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A4E869.7060401@kolumbus.fi> Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 18:40:25 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alpesh Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] [Fwd: Re: Question on Binding Refresh Advice option] References: <40A25BC0.5080905@cisco.com> <40A28656.2080408@kolumbus.fi> <40A2C83C.2060609@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <40A2C83C.2060609@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alpesh wrote: > Jari - > > This is fine. I would suggest that we add a sentence reflecting the fact > that if the mobile node does not > send BU to refresh the Binding cache, HA would not do anything. The text > says "SHOULD", > but the first time I read this I was pondering the applicability. I see your point, but I'm reluctant to add anything more at this stage. Sorry! The name of the option is "Advice", so I think it can be interpreted this way. If there's future confusion about it, we can always fix it in the updated RFC at a later date. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 14 17:44:44 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA00167 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:44:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOkPh-0006eb-Nf for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:40:19 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4ELeHQ8025566 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:40:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOkBH-0000uA-5N for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:25:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28940 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:25:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOkBE-0001rW-Uy for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:25:20 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOkAF-0001Mq-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:24:20 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOk9I-0000rZ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:23:20 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOk57-0007Ct-Hc; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:19:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOjti-0003mm-73 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:07:16 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27106 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:07:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOjtf-0001Tt-V4 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:07:12 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOjrX-0000eg-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:05:00 -0400 Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOjoL-0006qs-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:01:41 -0400 Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.87.31]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4EL1ahs026444; Fri, 14 May 2004 15:01:36 -0600 (MDT) Received: from shubho (shubho.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.85.207]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.0.Beta0+Sun/8.13.0.Beta0) with SMTP id i4EL1ZeH302334; Fri, 14 May 2004 14:01:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200405142101.i4EL1ZeH302334@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 14:01:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Samita Chakrabarti Reply-To: Samita Chakrabarti Subject: Re: [Mip6] issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification To: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi, mip6@ietf.org, mroe@microsoft.com Cc: eremmell@treck.com, vijayd@IPRG.nokia.com, Brian.Haley@hp.com, Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: 7R9yWE/oVvbC+KvIC5AbuQ== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.6_53 SunOS 5.10 sun4u sparc Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi Jari, Hope it's not too late to comment on this. > > (a) Computation of authentication data when MN deregisters from a foreign link. > > > > You proposed: > > > > Mobility Data = care-of address | correspondent | MH Data > > Authenticator = First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, Mobility Data)) > > > > Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the > > care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node > > if the Binding Update succeeds. Note that this address > > might be different from the source address of the Binding Update > > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. > > > > This still isn't very clear. I take it that "Care-of address" > > is meant to be the home address (not the CoA) when the lifetime > > of the binding is zero? > > Yes. Maybe: > > Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the > care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node > if the Binding Update succeeds, or the home address of the > mobile node if this option is used in de-registration. Note also that > this address might be different from the source address of the Binding Update > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. > > I think this falls into the category of a clarification > rather than a technical change. If people can agree to this, > I can notify the RFC editor. Yes this is just clarification. I have experienced interop problem at Connectathon this time because of ambiguity. I'd prefer the text to be clearer; note that the word "different" in the following line is not clear. >Note also that > this address might be different from the source address of the Binding Update > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. > We need to clarify further, for example: 1) If BU lifetime =0, with or without home-address option. COA = homeaddr 2) If Alt-COA is present and this is not a de-registration request, then COA = address in alternate COA option Thanks, -Samita _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 14 17:55:34 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA00852 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:55:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOkYj-0000O1-T4 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:49:38 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4ELnbXd001480 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:49:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOkRp-0007QZ-P1 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:42:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA29934 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:42:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOkRn-0002o9-9y for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:42:27 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOkQS-0001lC-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:41:04 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOkOw-0000nA-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:39:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOk8z-0000Np-3W; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:23:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOk4Q-00073r-C6 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:18:18 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28248 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:18:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOk4O-0005dr-1M for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:18:16 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOk2D-0004Zm-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:16:01 -0400 Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.42.13]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOjye-0003A3-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:12:20 -0400 Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.87.130]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4ELBn6b019244; Fri, 14 May 2004 14:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shubho (shubho.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.85.207]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.0.Beta0+Sun/8.13.0.Beta0) with SMTP id i4ELBnBX306149; Fri, 14 May 2004 14:11:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200405142111.i4ELBnBX306149@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 14:12:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Samita Chakrabarti Reply-To: Samita Chakrabarti Subject: Re: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 #4 To: Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com Cc: jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi, mip6@ietf.org, Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: 3SXduS67BLoyNWHJvaxz/w== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.6_53 SunOS 5.10 sun4u sparc Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > I think I said if the Home Address option is present and home > address is equal to care-of, then it means de-registration to > the receiver irrespective of what the lifetime field is. > Why do we need to have this variation in de-registration ? For simplicity, why can't we always mandate lifetime = 0 for de-registration ? > if the lifetime is 0, it always means de-registration. > > > Does the draft already allow a de-registration with lifetime non-zero ? Having lifetime =0 for all de-registration requests with or without HAO makes sense to me. Thanks, -Samita _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 14 18:29:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA03607 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:29:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOl7W-0006Wv-N3 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:25:34 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4EMPYJO025102 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:25:34 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOl5h-0005xA-GT for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:23:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA03350 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:23:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOl5e-0000BV-LO for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:23:38 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOl4Z-0007U3-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:22:32 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOl3f-0006zW-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:21:36 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOkwL-0002Ds-6R; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:14:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOkpw-0006wA-9J for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:07:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA01810 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:07:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOkpt-0007jt-E3 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:07:21 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOkow-0007Ei-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:06:22 -0400 Received: from rrcs-central-24-123-162-109.biz.rr.com ([24.123.162.109] helo=treckfs1.treck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOknr-00069Q-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 18:05:16 -0400 Received: from ed3GHZP4 ([64.170.248.130]) by treckfs1.treck.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 14 May 2004 18:05:15 -0400 From: "Ed Remmell" To: "'Samita Chakrabarti'" , Cc: , , Subject: RE: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 #4 Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 15:05:20 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcQ5+/JsRlvJp5BcQVm4xULBsnngmgAAp2TA In-Reply-To: <200405142111.i4ELBnBX306149@jurassic.eng.sun.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 May 2004 22:05:15.0913 (UTC) FILETIME=[8979EF90:01C439FF] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I think I said if the Home Address option is present and > home address > > is equal to care-of, then it means de-registration to the receiver > > irrespective of what the lifetime field is. > > > > Why do we need to have this variation in de-registration ? > > For simplicity, why can't we always mandate lifetime = 0 for > de-registration ? Well, if a home agent or CN receives a binding update request that specifies a non-zero lifetime but HoA = CoA, does it make sense to create such a mobility binding where HoA = CoA? No, it does not. So, it is important to also check that HoA != CoA before accepting a new binding update request with a non-zero lifetime. Along the same lines, in general, any BU that has HoA = CoA would be handled as a deregistration BU, regardless of the setting of the lifetime field. I'm OK if you change the draft (if it needs to be changed - I haven't checked to see what it currently says) to state that a valid MN deregistration BUs MUST have both lifetime=0 and HoA=CoA set in the BU (of course, there are different variations of HoA=CoA, because of the Alternate Care-of Address option and the Home Address Destination option). Thanks. - Ed --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.676 / Virus Database: 438 - Release Date: 5/3/2004 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 14 19:36:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06423 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:36:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOmD1-0004hS-3i for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:35:19 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4ENZJqC018067 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:35:19 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOmBE-0004E8-GX for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:33:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06248 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:33:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOmBC-0003IL-Rg for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:33:26 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOmAA-0002ng-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:32:22 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOm96-00027y-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:31:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOm4z-0002ot-8q; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:27:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOlrq-0007mc-37 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:13:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA05374 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:13:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOlro-00015u-JV for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:13:24 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOlqo-0000bM-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:12:22 -0400 Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOlpf-0007Qn-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:11:11 -0400 Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.81.144]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4ENB5hs017912; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:11:05 -0600 (MDT) Received: from shubho (shubho.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.85.207]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.0.Beta0+Sun/8.13.0.Beta0) with SMTP id i4ENB47T354631; Fri, 14 May 2004 16:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200405142311.i4ENB47T354631@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 16:11:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Samita Chakrabarti Reply-To: Samita Chakrabarti Subject: RE: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 #4 To: eremmell@treck.com Cc: mip6@ietf.org, Vijay.Devarapalli@nokia.com, Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: 2xH9BRp9xNRR4FciXbsJJQ== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.6_53 SunOS 5.10 sun4u sparc Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > For simplicity, why can't we always mandate lifetime = 0 for > > de-registration ? > > Well, if a home agent or CN receives a binding update request that specifies > a non-zero lifetime but HoA = CoA, does it make sense to create such a > mobility binding where HoA = CoA? No, it does not. So, it is important to I agree that we should check hoA != COA for non-zero lifetime. > also check that HoA != CoA before accepting a new binding update request > with a non-zero lifetime. Along the same lines, in general, any BU that has > HoA = CoA would be handled as a deregistration BU, regardless of the setting > of the lifetime field. > > I guess it was discussed earlier and if it is already in the draft that HoA=COA would be considered as de-reg request irrespective of lifetime value - then it's not worth discussing now. Perhaps we can re-visit its usefulness later. Thanks, -Samita _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri May 14 19:45:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06712 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOmET-0004yv-HV for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:36:49 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4ENanrf019144 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:36:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOmD9-0004m4-Ji for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:35:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06305 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:35:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOmD7-0004Hz-Tq for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:35:26 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOmC9-0003mR-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:34:25 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOmB2-00035X-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:33:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOm50-0002p3-JS; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:27:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOlrv-0007or-Sd for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:13:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA05393 for ; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:13:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOlru-00016N-8i for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:13:30 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOlr2-0000cP-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:12:36 -0400 Received: from neon.tcs.hut.fi ([130.233.215.20]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOlqD-00006E-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 19:11:45 -0400 Received: from rhea.tcs.hut.fi (rhea.tcs.hut.fi [130.233.215.147]) by neon.tcs.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400878001B4 for ; Sat, 15 May 2004 02:11:38 +0300 (EEST) Received: from rhea.tcs.hut.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rhea.tcs.hut.fi (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i4ENBcTL021203 for ; Sat, 15 May 2004 02:11:38 +0300 Received: from localhost (whaddad@localhost) by rhea.tcs.hut.fi (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i4ENBbn6021199 for ; Sat, 15 May 2004 02:11:38 +0300 X-Authentication-Warning: rhea.tcs.hut.fi: whaddad owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 02:11:37 +0300 (EEST) From: Wassim Haddad To: mip6@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Mip6] OMIPv6+ Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi all, A New Internet Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Applying Cryptographically Generated Addresses to OMIPv6 (OMIPv6+) Author(s) : W. Haddad, et al. Filename : draft-haddad-mip6-cga-omipv6-01.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2004-5-14 This memo suggests a new and enhanced route optimization security mechanism, CGA-OMIPv6 (OMIPv6+), for Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6). The primary motivations for OMIPv6+ are the reduction of signaling load, handoff delay and enabling semi-long term security associations. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-haddad-mip6-cga-omipv6-01.txt Comments are appreciated. Regards, Wassim H. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat May 15 01:38:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA20913 for ; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:38:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOrrM-0005qu-Un for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:37:22 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4F5bKWO022492 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:37:20 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOrqo-0005aN-FE for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:36:46 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA20776 for ; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:36:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOrql-0006nj-DO for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:36:43 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOrpl-0006Ks-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:35:42 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOrpB-0005sj-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:35:05 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOrfR-0003oa-2B; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:25:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOrd9-0003Qj-OM for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:23:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA20365 for ; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:22:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOrd6-0000Fb-Mv for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:22:36 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOrcD-0007ah-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:21:42 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOrbG-00077y-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 15 May 2004 01:20:43 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601938987A; Sat, 15 May 2004 08:20:37 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A5A7D5.50003@kolumbus.fi> Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 08:17:09 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Samita Chakrabarti Cc: mip6@ietf.org, mroe@microsoft.com, eremmell@treck.com, vijayd@IPRG.nokia.com, Brian.Haley@hp.com, Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com, gregos@microsoft.com Subject: Re: [Mip6] issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification References: <200405142101.i4EL1ZeH302334@jurassic.eng.sun.com> In-Reply-To: <200405142101.i4EL1ZeH302334@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Samita Chakrabarti wrote: > Hi Jari, > > Hope it's not too late to comment on this. It may be. I sent the edits to the RFC editor yesterday. But I'll take a look at this anyway, and if there's a serious problem we can do something. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 00:01:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11365 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:01:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZCO-0004wY-HW for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:56 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4H3ruds019002 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZ4X-0003xj-Iw for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:45:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA10758 for ; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:45:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPZ4V-0005S8-J2 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:45:47 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZ3b-00059Q-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:44:51 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZ2q-0004qs-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:44:04 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPYzv-0003Ol-1k; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:41:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BNwIx-0004zT-Tc for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:09:59 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22047 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:09:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BNwIw-00035x-5N for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:09:58 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BNwHq-0002Yv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:08:50 -0400 Received: from ftpbox.mot.com ([129.188.136.101]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BNwH6-00022c-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:08:04 -0400 Received: from az33exr02.mot.com (az33exr02.mot.com [10.64.251.232]) by ftpbox.mot.com (Motorola/Ftpbox) with ESMTP id i4CG844k018050 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 09:08:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from zfr01srv02.crm.mot.com (zfr01srv02.crm.mot.com [10.161.201.8]) by az33exr02.mot.com (Motorola/az33exr02) with ESMTP id i4CG6MTV008504 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 11:06:50 -0500 Received: from motorola.com (zfr01-2117.crm.mot.com [10.161.201.117]) by zfr01srv02.crm.mot.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92828865980 for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 18:07:32 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <40A24BBC.4010702@motorola.com> Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 18:07:24 +0200 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.83.5.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms040707020606060703010409" Subject: [Mip6] Questions on Binding Refresh Request and Binding Error Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms040707020606060703010409 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Can the Binding Refresh Request and Binding Error types of messages be sent by a Home Agent too (in addition to being sent by the CN)? When the BRR and the BE are sent by CN (not by HA), do they have to include a Routing Header type 2? Alex --------------ms040707020606060703010409 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIOzDCC A10wggJFoAMCAQICCwEAAAAAAPtjjP4sMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMHcxCzAJBgNVBAYTAkJF MRkwFwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMSAwHgYDVQQLExdQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gQ2xh c3MgMiBDQTErMCkGA1UEAxMiR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMiBDQTAe Fw0wNDAzMTkxNDM2MTVaFw0wNTAzMTkxNDM2MTVaMFoxCzAJBgNVBAYTAkZSMRswGQYDVQQD ExJBbGV4YW5kcnUgUGV0cmVzY3UxLjAsBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWH2FsZXhhbmRydS5wZXRyZXNj dUBtb3Rvcm9sYS5jb20wgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBANcRvXtDyRkqrlPe Sre3uXYCWkWFMpzBAfnQ6XivCdhZuAlRpYShJBWmJv9GHSZzkI+V5QpcI/TqGsZqLumCrwWL A7+zk1H3aHoPn5a2fzVCi7+0RyLnZPnKh90sdsJ90jm58R8NI271OK5AcdV9ugd7FDss1h4i mwFETBASnV7nAgMBAAGjgYowgYcwEQYJYIZIAYb4QgEBBAQDAgWgMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIE 8DAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRtxCvBfYUQoPkTFg1VKwO6NkwhMTBBBgNVHR8EOjA4MDagNKAyhjBo dHRwOi8vY3JsLmdsb2JhbHNpZ24ubmV0L1BlcnNvbmFsU2lnbkNsYXNzMi5jcmwwDQYJKoZI hvcNAQEFBQADggEBACSXcjWSr6AczkIEmM01J6z16NS4sKnX5oSt8dDZmYdgpQC8UR9wuT19 MJbPhwggg5+y6t7s/d223eW3xQR57rn9yUkV1daqtUKWXa7iosjI6VPG/MTODRP0luCcmg4/ LyJYqSKBheS/A1yTajvzqIB7wzr1l/4u7Hty85CiHYXVVkFGW1kWnhDS1gq5rxuCIH+gvggB zbFasAcywV7IXROr5sfoCiNaJfnr9tt/IO6GVaIkdBkZS7wC0Imt3DoRTbPdWN7am0Y5uS6y a0XBbEjuP5PTmM6Bc+6Mc+aQ1YUKapCPdnxw1vTrB9adPZQDVBgmWXxM/mW5xnsXZV90n9Qw ggNdMIICRaADAgECAgsBAAAAAAD7Y4z+LDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADB3MQswCQYDVQQGEwJC RTEZMBcGA1UEChMQR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBudi1zYTEgMB4GA1UECxMXUGVyc29uYWxTaWduIENs YXNzIDIgQ0ExKzApBgNVBAMTIkdsb2JhbFNpZ24gUGVyc29uYWxTaWduIENsYXNzIDIgQ0Ew HhcNMDQwMzE5MTQzNjE1WhcNMDUwMzE5MTQzNjE1WjBaMQswCQYDVQQGEwJGUjEbMBkGA1UE AxMSQWxleGFuZHJ1IFBldHJlc2N1MS4wLAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFh9hbGV4YW5kcnUucGV0cmVz Y3VAbW90b3JvbGEuY29tMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDXEb17Q8kZKq5T 3kq3t7l2AlpFhTKcwQH50Ol4rwnYWbgJUaWEoSQVpib/Rh0mc5CPleUKXCP06hrGai7pgq8F iwO/s5NR92h6D5+Wtn81Qou/tEci52T5yofdLHbCfdI5ufEfDSNu9TiuQHHVfboHexQ7LNYe IpsBREwQEp1e5wIDAQABo4GKMIGHMBEGCWCGSAGG+EIBAQQEAwIFoDAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMC BPAwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUbcQrwX2FEKD5ExYNVSsDujZMITEwQQYDVR0fBDowODA2oDSgMoYw aHR0cDovL2NybC5nbG9iYWxzaWduLm5ldC9QZXJzb25hbFNpZ25DbGFzczIuY3JsMA0GCSqG SIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQAkl3I1kq+gHM5CBJjNNSes9ejUuLCp1+aErfHQ2ZmHYKUAvFEfcLk9 fTCWz4cIIIOfsure7P3dtt3lt8UEee65/clJFdXWqrVCll2u4qLIyOlTxvzEzg0T9JbgnJoO Py8iWKkigYXkvwNck2o786iAe8M69Zf+Lux7cvOQoh2F1VZBRltZFp4Q0tYKua8bgiB/oL4I Ac2xWrAHMsFeyF0Tq+bH6AojWiX56/bbfyDuhlWiJHQZGUu8AtCJrdw6EU2z3Vje2ptGObku smtFwWxI7j+T05jOgXPujHPmkNWFCmqQj3Z8cNb06wfWnT2UA1QYJll8TP5lucZ7F2VfdJ/U MIID4zCCAsugAwIBAgILBAAAAAAA8HYD2XwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwVzELMAkGA1UEBhMC QkUxGTAXBgNVBAoTEEdsb2JhbFNpZ24gbnYtc2ExEDAOBgNVBAsTB1Jvb3QgQ0ExGzAZBgNV BAMTEkdsb2JhbFNpZ24gUm9vdCBDQTAeFw05OTAxMjgxMjAwMDBaFw0wOTAxMjgxMjAwMDBa MG0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAkJFMRkwFwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMRswGQYDVQQLExJQ cmltYXJ5IENsYXNzIDIgQ0ExJjAkBgNVBAMTHUdsb2JhbFNpZ24gUHJpbWFyeSBDbGFzcyAy IENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAkoz+7/RFjhdBbvzYvyFvqwad UsEsAJ0/joW4f0qPvaBjKspJJ65agvR04lWS/8LRqnmitvrVnYIET8ayxl5jpzq62O7rim+f trsoQcAi+05IGgaS17/Xz7nZvThPOw1EblVB/vwJ29i/844h8egStfYTpdPGTJMisAL/7h0M xKhrT3VoVujcKBJQ96gknS4kOfsJBd7lo2RJIdBofnEwkbFg4Dn0UPh6TZgAa3x5uk7OSuK6 Nh23xTYVlZxkQupfxLr1QAW+4TpZvYSnGbjeTVNQzgfR0lHT7w2BbObnbctdfD98zOxPgycl /3BQ9oNZdYQGZlgs3omNAKZJ+aVDdwIDAQABo4GZMIGWMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIBBjAPBgNV HRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MB0GA1UdDgQWBBR857KxLN6xp2vpdgzho/1ObMe59jAzBgNVHR8ELDAq MCigJqAkhiJodHRwOi8vY3JsLmdsb2JhbHNpZ24ubmV0L1Jvb3QuY3JsMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaA FGB7ZhpFDZfKiVAvfQTNNKj//P1LMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCOSXXBWIDxAxy2Zioi dZVbZLmecRI30bfezE8WYEUUAke+bIj39Rsdpp2qGW58HDqEpMWNqTwx/g3oQt8hUCLucQGB qGQzlPGtnVpbADfipFzkIKpgdJQ967DpIZ0dNKmmNINBXuM6/yEe0hup7XYtvi9PKFx5qeCW kf7KDCruRY51KismvY6uCN2LuVeN/20LqwhGDJ/5gii8H64MclYNd5qgiFd4JziNL3Ur1HFq FEiluobJ33wmE54tbMhb9Wt8HzhnL47U16jZhe0K4PKYadkal6ZQl5zHPSRZbrGhvY2mMhGd VAFbK4Lh/Y3FaEMN4LgmVJ5/E94Qp2n6siqBMIIEHzCCAwegAwIBAgILBAAAAAAA+j3u7Hkw DQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwbTELMAkGA1UEBhMCQkUxGTAXBgNVBAoTEEdsb2JhbFNpZ24gbnYt c2ExGzAZBgNVBAsTElByaW1hcnkgQ2xhc3MgMiBDQTEmMCQGA1UEAxMdR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBQ cmltYXJ5IENsYXNzIDIgQ0EwHhcNMDQwMTIyMDkwMDAwWhcNMDkwMTI4MTEwMDAwWjB3MQsw CQYDVQQGEwJCRTEZMBcGA1UEChMQR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBudi1zYTEgMB4GA1UECxMXUGVyc29u YWxTaWduIENsYXNzIDIgQ0ExKzApBgNVBAMTIkdsb2JhbFNpZ24gUGVyc29uYWxTaWduIENs YXNzIDIgQ0EwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCpGIoCeDYfk4ikDHQ5 gQjc7gUny+ppV8euTaijN9tv1W69R1sdecNf/9e6vCyhf1LFzVmOaZX8X41n93Eu/7L34wHM 192JAKYSJMMkRNi2iYJOqECQEQUsIFxV8uF2iTiGel9k8S74gV6TeE4EVwrkUXgqs+j5JLtJ XkUpi/E3tambQx83cZzEMqvhKgMzvR4fkmr3SVvdKbND7mqreLiUngjpMlAxvmr/9+6KMug0 ccBdnyQFAakOmFkZzfVh5MRihhaTK4gByIj46Oyu8kb9pdw5McWCdps5SHFLXIWLhCSlZAGJ 9PRkKdJewx3CFsdzJtufRyrmNU5y9nSl2TajAgMBAAGjgbUwgbIwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEG MBIGA1UdEwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQAwHQYDVR0OBBYEFG3EK8F9hRCg+RMWDVUrA7o2TCExMDkG A1UdHwQyMDAwLqAsoCqGKGh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuZ2xvYmFsc2lnbi5uZXQvcHJpbWNsYXNzMi5j cmwwEQYJYIZIAYb4QgEBBAQDAgEGMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFHznsrEs3rGna+l2DOGj/U5sx7n2 MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQALrc674tzSl8eLA0DJAIqM2p4mtbmwnc0GISd/zKyNtcNm g27HP83wCEYxI5M1EGWIyEqBLQ12O03AnagXhZdc16O+YaX1EZaumurEd0lzXA+PmqT4nj78 NXL9uUUsWOlHmiDhdyZgCprCY7Cr1Go/y+tPXvr2lrtVfpCpCSvvOS7CHsnAep+TXeR63V1X bmRkqC/PX1FHpF3yUFz5vMWQlhWd2GuA20opRgIhBNQqmNKVS4aZ6XUBbZI5lqQnzRJBomVu ggxb1bvn3KWBE8d+TzzWkUbVnjcmMdvcI3LpDbrOS1nqrE1WdlLzGjsk+KqWemyKhEOzePCn CGlrOgvFMYIDGDCCAxQCAQEwgYYwdzELMAkGA1UEBhMCQkUxGTAXBgNVBAoTEEdsb2JhbFNp Z24gbnYtc2ExIDAeBgNVBAsTF1BlcnNvbmFsU2lnbiBDbGFzcyAyIENBMSswKQYDVQQDEyJH bG9iYWxTaWduIFBlcnNvbmFsU2lnbiBDbGFzcyAyIENBAgsBAAAAAAD7Y4z+LDAJBgUrDgMC GgUAoIIB5zAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wNDA1 MTIxNjA3MjRaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBTuIUwh9O5guvE88Xbdik9w/7YjEzBSBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAH BgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBKDCBlwYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYGJMIGGMHcxCzAJBgNVBAYT AkJFMRkwFwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMSAwHgYDVQQLExdQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24g Q2xhc3MgMiBDQTErMCkGA1UEAxMiR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMiBD QQILAQAAAAAA+2OM/iwwgZkGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMYGJoIGGMHcxCzAJBgNVBAYTAkJFMRkw FwYDVQQKExBHbG9iYWxTaWduIG52LXNhMSAwHgYDVQQLExdQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gQ2xhc3Mg MiBDQTErMCkGA1UEAxMiR2xvYmFsU2lnbiBQZXJzb25hbFNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMiBDQQILAQAA AAAA+2OM/iwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEgYAOF69Es6EqyQilZ1QHK2OyjGWZpeMixwcgk/Hm YqprL9axOIMKKLY6Zxuu3syJvJgiy+xJOsYGX8IAXT8EfO09VmV1rbyu8mgXQ7pP5+bTiT+A 9QB/Eq7FIi1Pg8Tk1GajYxUzg2/faNHWdYCJG+YMI7MyZSNnQrf61LsXXCfpsgAAAAAAAA== --------------ms040707020606060703010409-- _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 00:02:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11383 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:02:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZCQ-0004xt-9z for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:59 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4H3rwIB019081 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:58 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZ8E-0004F1-PM for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:49:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA10856 for ; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:49:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPZ8C-0006cm-L4 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:49:36 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZ7D-0006L4-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:48:36 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZ6c-00063d-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:47:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPYzv-0003Ot-Gp; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:41:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOChU-0008O1-Hr for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:40:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA00540 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:40:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOChQ-0003gE-WC for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:40:21 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOCgK-00038U-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:39:12 -0400 Received: from mail-dub.microsoft.com ([213.199.128.160]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOCfM-0002Wl-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:38:12 -0400 Received: from dub-imc-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.196.22]) by mail-dub.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:37:42 +0100 Received: from 65.53.196.22 by dub-imc-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:37:42 +0100 Received: from EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.192.43]) by dub-imc-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:37:42 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 10:37:36 +0100 Message-ID: <579E83556A36E44EB2945CCE990B31740159AA51@EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com> Thread-Topic: issue 327 part 2 status -- need not check the tunnel src if using ESP Thread-Index: AcQ4QjFaQOC9+7WsRmm2CDKlN5NZ6QAi6vEA From: "Michael Roe" To: "Jari Arkko" , , "Vijay Devarapalli" Cc: , "Brian Haley" , , "Greg O'Shea" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2004 09:37:42.0004 (UTC) FILETIME=[F00CD340:01C438CD] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 2 status -- need not check the tunnel src if using ESP Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, this text is OK with me. Mike=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi]=20 > Sent: 12 May 2004 17:54 > To: mip6@ietf.org; Vijay Devarapalli > Cc: Michael Roe; eremmell@treck.com; Brian Haley;=20 > Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; Greg O'Shea > Subject: issue 327 part 2 status -- need not check the tunnel=20 > src if using ESP >=20 >=20 > I think we have an agreement on this one. > Suggested text is: >=20 > This check is not necessary if the reverse-tunneled packet > is protected by ESP in tunnel mode. >=20 > --Jari >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 00:07:44 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11656 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:07:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZJO-0005Mc-P9 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:01:10 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4H41A6L020614 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:01:10 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZCJ-0004qL-Av for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA10942 for ; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPZCH-00000y-2K for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZBS-0007Sd-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:52:58 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZ9a-0006wZ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:51:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPYzw-0003PV-2c; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:41:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOCzQ-0002te-Qm for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:58:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA01419 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:58:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOCzN-0006Ko-5s for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:58:53 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOCy4-0005HC-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:57:32 -0400 Received: from mail-eur.microsoft.com ([213.199.128.145]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOCwm-00048n-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:56:12 -0400 Received: from eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.196.43]) by mail-eur.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:55:43 +0100 Received: from 65.53.196.43 by eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:55:43 +0100 Received: from EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.192.43]) by eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:55:42 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 10:55:37 +0100 Message-ID: <579E83556A36E44EB2945CCE990B31740159AA74@EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com> Thread-Topic: issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification Thread-Index: AcQ4QdvFgjAstkvXQSmUKpGCI+q/iwAjM15w From: "Michael Roe" To: "Jari Arkko" , Cc: , "Vijay Devarapalli" , "Brian Haley" , , "Greg O'Shea" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2004 09:55:42.0885 (UTC) FILETIME=[744E2D50:01C438D0] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 1 status -- BAD calculation clarification Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This proposal looks OK to me. It makes me very nervous that we're going = to accidentally break something important, but I can't see anything wrong with it. I view it as a technical changte, because it explicitly permits a new = case (deregistration while away from home) tnat had not been considered in = some of the earlier security analysis of the protocol. So, OK, I don't mind if you go ahead and make this change. Mike > Yes. Maybe: >=20 > Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the > care-of address which will be registered for the mobile node > if the Binding Update succeeds, or the home address of the > mobile node if this option is used in de-registration.=20 > Note also that > this address might be different from the source address=20 > of the Binding Update > message, if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is > used, or when the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. >=20 > I think this falls into the category of a clarification > rather than a technical change. If people can agree to this, > I can notify the RFC editor. >=20 > --Jari >=20 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 00:08:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11687 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:08:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZL1-0005XS-3S for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:02:51 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4H42pPM021285 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:02:51 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZD2-0004z5-A8 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:54:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA10974 for ; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:54:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPZD0-0000JN-42 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:54:34 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZC1-0007k0-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:34 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZAm-0006wz-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:52:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPYzw-0003QH-Jg; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:41:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BOD2J-0003Wx-AB for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:01:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA01614 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:01:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BOD2F-0000D6-Ke for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:01:51 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BOD1H-0007S7-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:00:51 -0400 Received: from mail-eur.microsoft.com ([213.199.128.145]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BOD0I-0006M7-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 05:59:50 -0400 Received: from eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.196.43]) by mail-eur.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:59:20 +0100 Received: from 65.53.196.43 by eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:59:20 +0100 Received: from EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.192.43]) by eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 10:59:20 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 10:59:15 +0100 Message-ID: <579E83556A36E44EB2945CCE990B31740159AA87@EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com> Thread-Topic: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff Thread-Index: AcQ4RAU8M64UlRRnROa0CclyGTGw2QAATybwAAAfy/AAIsBAwA== From: "Michael Roe" To: "Ed Remmell" , "Jari Arkko" , , "Vijay Devarapalli" , "Brian Haley" Cc: , "Greg O'Shea" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2004 09:59:20.0541 (UTC) FILETIME=[F609D8D0:01C438D0] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This change is OK with me. Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Remmell [mailto:eremmell@treck.com]=20 > Sent: 12 May 2004 18:24 > To: 'Jari Arkko'; mip6@ietf.org; Michael Roe; 'Vijay=20 > Devarapalli'; 'Brian Haley' > Cc: Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; Greg O'Shea > Subject: RE: issue 327 part 3 status -- SPD entry stuff >=20 > "same time as" -> "same time that" >=20 > "Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically stops=20 > operating at the > same time *that* the home registration is deleted." >=20 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 00:08:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11704 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:08:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZL1-0005Z3-OU for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:02:51 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4H42pWh021374 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 00:02:51 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPZDJ-0004zo-UO for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:54:54 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA11021 for ; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:54:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPZDH-0000Lh-P5 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:54:51 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZCK-00001d-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:53 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPZBe-0007Sy-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:53:10 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPYzx-0003Qy-8s; Sun, 16 May 2004 23:41:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BODCC-00063i-BB for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:12:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA02194 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:12:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BODC8-0005hQ-Iu for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:12:04 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BODB8-00058D-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:11:03 -0400 Received: from mail-eur.microsoft.com ([213.199.128.145]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BODAC-0004A2-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 06:10:04 -0400 Received: from eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.196.43]) by mail-eur.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 11:09:35 +0100 Received: from 65.53.196.43 by eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Thu, 13 May 2004 11:09:35 +0100 Received: from EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com ([65.53.192.43]) by eur-imc-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 13 May 2004 11:09:35 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 11:09:30 +0100 Message-ID: <579E83556A36E44EB2945CCE990B31740159AAA2@EUR-MSG-02.europe.corp.microsoft.com> Thread-Topic: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules Thread-Index: AcQ4RgJCsqcFMKvgSDOGUpOLXuMEfAAi5tzQ From: "Michael Roe" To: "Jari Arkko" , , , "Vijay Devarapalli" , "Brian Haley" , , "Greg O'Shea" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2004 10:09:35.0744 (UTC) FILETIME=[64BA6000:01C438D2] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Mip6] RE: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This change is OK with me. If I recall correctly, our implementation sometimes needs to send a BU = when the remaining valid lifetime of the CoA is less than 4 seconds. In this = case, we make sure to round up to avoid a lifetime of 0. So "MUST be non-zero" = and "SHOULD be less than or equal ..." sounds right. Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi]=20 > Sent: 12 May 2004 18:20 > To: mip6@ietf.org; Michael Roe; eremmell@treck.com; Vijay=20 > Devarapalli; Brian Haley; Yukiyo.Akisada@jp.yokogawa.com; Greg O'Shea > Subject: issue 327 part 4 status -- HAO & lifetime rules >=20 >=20 > Unless I'm missing something, with Ed's text for part > 2, the only thing that remains for the part 4 is this: >=20 > o The value specified in the Lifetime field SHOULD be=20 > less than or > equal to the remaining valid lifetime of the home=20 > address and the > care-of address specified for the binding. >=20 > =3D> >=20 > o The value specified in the Lifetime field MUST be non-zero and > SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime > of the home address and the care-of address specified for the > binding. >=20 > If this is it, I think this clarification can be added. > Note that the MUST is not a new requirement, all this is > really implied by other parts of the spec already. >=20 > --Jari >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 01:25:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15447 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:25:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPac7-0000Dl-PP for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:24:36 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4H5OZNr000838 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:24:35 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPaZS-0008Nw-Pl for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:21:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15266 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:21:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPaZP-0003K7-Re for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:21:47 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPaYQ-00031n-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:20:47 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPaXo-0002jc-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:20:08 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPaR1-0007E4-0D; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:13:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPaPb-0006u7-KO for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:11:39 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15045 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:11:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPaPY-0000S9-LZ for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:11:36 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPaOd-0000BH-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:10:40 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPaOF-0007hH-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 01:10:15 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8C88986F; Mon, 17 May 2004 08:10:01 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40A84850.3030004@kolumbus.fi> Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 08:06:24 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandru Petrescu Cc: mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] Questions on Binding Refresh Request and Binding Error References: <40A24BBC.4010702@motorola.com> In-Reply-To: <40A24BBC.4010702@motorola.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > Hi, > > Can the Binding Refresh Request and Binding Error types of messages be > sent by a Home Agent too (in addition to being sent by the CN)? Binding Error messages can be sent, see: 10.2 Processing Mobility Headers All IPv6 home agents MUST observe the rules described in Section 9.2 when processing Mobility Headers. and 9.2 Processing Mobility Headers Mobility Header processing MUST observe the following rules: ... o The MH Type field MUST have a known value (Section 6.1.1). Otherwise, the node MUST discard the message and issue a Binding Error message as described in Section 9.3.3, with Status field set to 2 (unrecognized MH Type value). Binding Refresh Request is not explicitly talked about, but there's nothing that prevents this; a HA can be a CN too. > When the BRR and the BE are sent by CN (not by HA), do they have to > include a Routing Header type 2? I think this is explicitly forbidden. See Section 6.1: Mobility Header messages MUST NOT be sent with a type 2 routing header, except as described in Section 9.5.4 for Binding Acknowledgement. Mobility Header messages also MUST NOT be used with a Home Address destination option, except as described in Section 11.7.1 and Section 11.7.2 for Binding Update. Binding Update List or Binding Cache information (when present) for the destination MUST NOT be used in sending Mobility Header messages. That is, Mobility Header messages bypass both the Binding Cache check described in Section 9.3.2 and the Binding Update List check described in Section 11.3.1 which are normally performed for all packets. This applies even to messages sent to or from a correspondent node which is itself a mobile node. (Of course, if the HA sends MH messages to the mobile node, IPsec headers are likely added.) --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 17:50:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04498 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:50:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPpm6-0004ee-S8 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:35:54 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4HLZsH5017871 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:35:54 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPpNa-0007qS-Bd for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:10:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28362 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:10:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPpNY-00051D-6w for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:10:32 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPpIx-0003kQ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:05:48 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPpEL-0002Tc-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:01:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPoFT-0002nj-Jk; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:58:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPo3Q-0005U7-2S for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:45:40 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA19304; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:45:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200405171945.PAA19304@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: mip6@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 15:45:38 -0400 Subject: [Mip6] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Mobility for IPv6 Working Group of the IETF. Title : A Management Information Base for Mobile IPv6 Author(s) : G. Keeni, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt Pages : 80 Date : 2004-5-17 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB), the Mobile-IPv6 MIB , for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, the Mobile-IPv6 MIB will be used to monitor and control the mobile node, home agent and correspondent node functions of a Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) entity. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2004-5-17155938.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2004-5-17155938.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon May 17 17:56:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05551 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:56:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPpsj-0001EL-Aj for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:42:45 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4HLgjEx004715 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:42:45 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPpdt-0007KF-HK for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:27:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA01038 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPpdr-0001aC-4p for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:27:23 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPpaF-0000g4-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:23:40 -0400 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPpVE-0007C7-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:18:28 -0400 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BPpVF-0002p2-8h for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:18:29 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPosP-0002y3-NC; Mon, 17 May 2004 16:38:21 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BPoE9-0002UN-So for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:56:45 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20403 for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:56:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BPoE8-0002x3-Bl for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:56:44 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BPoDG-0002b1-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:55:51 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPoCT-00029C-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:55:01 -0400 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 May 2004 12:01:37 +0000 Received: from mira-sjc5-d.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-d.cisco.com [171.71.163.28]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4HJsTC1024996; Mon, 17 May 2004 12:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gdommety-w2k04.cisco.com ([128.107.176.123]) by mira-sjc5-d.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with ESMTP id ACB84884; Mon, 17 May 2004 12:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20040517125329.02ef1008@mira-sjc5-d.cisco.com> X-Sender: gdommety@mira-sjc5-d.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:54:57 -0700 To: mip6@ietf.org From: Gopal Dommety Cc: gdommety@cisco.com, "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Mip6] Agenda for 60th IETF San Diego - MIP6 WG Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hello All, We are in the process of determining the agenda for the next IETF. If you need a presentation slot, could you send us an email with the following information. 1. Discussion Topic: 2. Draft Name: 3. Slot Duration: 4. Is this in the scope of the Charter? (if not explain the relation) 5. What do you want to accomplish by this presentation (e.g resolve the following issues) 6. Was this draft discussed in the mailing list 7. What are the open issues? WG I-Ds and charter items will be given preference. Thanks Gopal _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed May 19 05:55:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA26379 for ; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:55:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQNhX-0007gO-FM for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:49:28 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4J9nRoJ029528 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:49:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQNLX-0001bL-Cx for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:26:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA23743 for ; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:26:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQNLU-00024E-2g for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:26:40 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQNKd-0001vS-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:25:48 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQNJv-0001mk-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:25:04 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQN4s-0007OT-Uc; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:09:30 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQLAu-0008Hh-Mk for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 03:07:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA17186 for ; Wed, 19 May 2004 03:07:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQLAq-0006Ap-LU for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 03:07:32 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQL9u-000635-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 03:06:35 -0400 Received: from email10.etsi.org ([212.234.161.112] helo=email10.etsihq.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQL97-0005op-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 03:05:45 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mip6] Agenda for 60th IETF San Diego - MIP6 WG Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 09:05:15 +0200 Message-ID: <4091553999CBE4409CC2B562152B5A3304953D2B@email10.etsihq.org> Thread-Topic: [Mip6] Agenda for 60th IETF San Diego - MIP6 WG Thread-Index: AcQ8VIC6GXsAmovVSXmGbZD1QdEQwABFYTlQ From: =?us-ascii?Q?Patrick_Rene_Guillemin?= To: "Gopal Dommety" Cc: , , , , "Plugtests" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Gopal & All, I would like to add 1. Discussion Topic: remote and face-to-face Plugtests (bake-off) of mip6 2. Draft Name: draft-kniveton-mipv6-remote-testing-00.txt 3. Slot Duration: 5 mn 4. Is this in the scope of the Charter? (if not explain the relation) YES 5. What do you want to accomplish by this presentation (e.g resolve the=20 following issues): report on http://mip6.plugtests.org/ registration and usage (*) 6. Was this draft discussed in the mailing list : draft-kniveton-mipv6-remote-testing-00.txt 7. What are the open issues? : discussion on how these remote tests are enabling next mip6 and IPv6 face-to-face Plugtests 11-15 Oct 2004 Cannes French Riviera http://www.etsi.org/plugtests/IPv6.htm (*) for thus who have got the mip6 test account I would like to continue (or start) to synchronize remote tests using the dedicated mailing list plugtests(mip6@list.etsi.org Thank you Patrick Patrick GUILLEMIN=20 ETSI - Plugtests Technical Coordinator=20 http://www.etsi.org/plugtests tel +33(0)4 92 94 43 31=20 fax +33(0)4 92 38 52 31=20 _______________________________________=20 -----Original Message----- From: Gopal Dommety [mailto:gdommety@cisco.com] Sent: 17 May 2004 21:55 To: mip6@ietf.org Cc: gdommety@cisco.com; Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Subject: [Mip6] Agenda for 60th IETF San Diego - MIP6 WG Hello All, We are in the process of determining the agenda for the next IETF. If you need a presentation slot, could you send us an email with the following information. 1. Discussion Topic: 2. Draft Name: 3. Slot Duration: 4. Is this in the scope of the Charter? (if not explain the relation) 5. What do you want to accomplish by this presentation (e.g resolve the=20 following issues) 6. Was this draft discussed in the mailing list 7. What are the open issues? WG I-Ds and charter items will be given preference. Thanks Gopal _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu May 20 13:51:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06659 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:51:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQrdT-0006fq-FF for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:47:15 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4KHlFpI025654 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:47:15 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQrS9-0003qs-1W for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:35:33 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05282 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:35:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQrS6-0002Va-Uy for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:35:31 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQrPz-00028W-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:33:20 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQrMr-0001eb-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:30:05 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQrC8-0008Cb-Ri; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:19:00 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQr4A-0005j5-1f for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:10:46 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02972 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:10:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQr47-0007QO-Sp for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:10:44 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQr39-0007L5-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:09:43 -0400 Received: from neon.tcs.hut.fi ([130.233.215.20]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQr2C-0007GC-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 13:08:44 -0400 Received: from rhea.tcs.hut.fi (rhea.tcs.hut.fi [130.233.215.147]) by neon.tcs.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16723800195 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 20:08:43 +0300 (EEST) Received: from rhea.tcs.hut.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rhea.tcs.hut.fi (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i4KH8gTL016206 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 20:08:42 +0300 Received: from localhost (whaddad@localhost) by rhea.tcs.hut.fi (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i4KH8gZL016202 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 20:08:42 +0300 X-Authentication-Warning: rhea.tcs.hut.fi: whaddad owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 20:08:42 +0300 (EEST) From: Wassim Haddad To: mip6@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Mip6] BUB+ Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi all, A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Applying Cryptographically Generated Addresses to BUB (BUB+) Author(s) : W. Haddad, et al. Filename : draft-haddad-mip6-cga-bub-00.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2004-5-19 This memo describes a method to exploit the Cryptographically Generated Address (CGA) features in highly mobile environment. The draft introduces a new optimization to the "Binding Update Backhauling (BUB)" proposal, which eliminates the need for running a return routability (RR) procedure at the beginning and improves its security. Comments are appreciated. Regards, Wassim H. _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu May 20 18:44:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA03340 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQwBG-0002Vr-Dj for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:38:26 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4KMcQQw009652 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:38:26 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQw7I-0001I0-OR for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:34:20 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02728 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:34:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQw7F-0006Oz-Mn for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:34:17 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQw6F-0006JL-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:33:16 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQw5M-0006ED-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:32:20 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQw0E-0007nq-JW; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:27:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQvpf-0003e6-Ts for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:16:07 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA01472 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:16:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQvpd-0005F5-22 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:16:05 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQvoy-0005CS-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:15:24 -0400 Received: from mgw-x3.nokia.com ([131.228.20.26]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQvnf-00056w-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 18:14:04 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x3.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i4KME3L04386 for ; Fri, 21 May 2004 01:14:03 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Fri, 21 May 2004 01:13:59 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.30 2004040916 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i4KMDxpb023011 for ; Fri, 21 May 2004 01:13:59 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00DzW27r; Fri, 21 May 2004 01:13:59 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i4KMDwH15834 for ; Fri, 21 May 2004 01:13:58 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe007.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.107]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Thu, 20 May 2004 17:13:20 -0500 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 17:13:20 -0500 Message-ID: <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF44024DC220@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: Checklist for I-Ds (including nits) Thread-Index: AcQ+t6hLhqOkMWQvQmuasTR+t+SoWg== To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 May 2004 22:13:20.0289 (UTC) FILETIME=[A8AA5910:01C43EB7] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Mip6] Checklist for I-Ds (including nits) Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Forwarded from IETF-Announce: > As you probably all know, we have used the ID-nits for a few > years to help you all to prepare your Internet-Drafts such that > they will process faster through the AD-review, IETF Last Call > and IESG approval process. > > The name was somewhat wrong in that it is more a serious checklist > than merely "nits" (however, there are some nits too). > The IESG, RFC-Editor and IANA have evaluated the checklist, and > a new (improved) ID-Checklist is now available at > > http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat May 22 04:07:09 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA19583 for ; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:07:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRRWS-0006CV-Be for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:06:25 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4M86OJ1023831 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:06:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRRVT-00060B-FC for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:05:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA19508 for ; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:05:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRRVQ-0000SA-M6 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:05:20 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRRUW-0000Jc-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:04:25 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRRTs-00009t-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:03:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRRQU-00056D-Oh; Sat, 22 May 2004 04:00:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRRPS-0004Zx-Kj for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 03:59:10 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA19287 for ; Sat, 22 May 2004 03:59:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRRPQ-0007Rf-0d for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 03:59:08 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRROZ-0007Ji-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 03:58:15 -0400 Received: from iramx1.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.10.80]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRRO5-0007BQ-00; Sat, 22 May 2004 03:57:45 -0400 Received: from i72ms2.tm.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.70.17] helo=i72mail01.tm.uka.de) by iramx1.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #10) id 1BRRO6-0003YW-00; Sat, 22 May 2004 09:57:46 +0200 Received: from i72chvogt.tm.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.71.83] helo=i72ChVogt) by i72mail01.tm.uka.de with esmtp (Exim 4.31) id 1BRRO4-0003dK-Dv; Sat, 22 May 2004 09:57:44 +0200 Message-ID: <010001c43fd2$76f05340$5347038d@tm.unikarlsruhe.de> From: "Christian Vogt" To: , Cc: "Jari Arkko" , "Roland Bless" , "Mark Doll" , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tobias_K=FCfner?= Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 09:57:44 +0200 Organization: Institute of Telematics, University of Karlsruhe (TH) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Subject: [Mip6] New I-Ds: Credit-Based Authorization Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MIME_BASE64_LATIN, MIME_BASE64_TEXT,OPT_HEADER autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgTUlQNiBhbmQgTU9CT1BUUyBmb2xrcywNCg0KZmlyc3QgaWRlYXMgb2YgYSBjcmVkaXQtYmFz ZWQgYXV0aG9yaXphdGlvbiBzY2hlbWUgZm9yIE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2IEVhcmx5IEJpbmRpbmcgVXBk YXRlcyB3ZXJlIHByZXNlbnRlZCBpbiB0aGUgTU9CT1BUUyBzZXNzaW9uIGF0IHRoZSA1OXRoIElF VEYgbWVldGluZyBpbiBTZW91bC4gVGhlc2UgaWRlYXMgaGF2ZSBpbiB0aGUgbWVhbnRpbWUgYmVl biBlbGFib3JhdGVkIHVwb24gd2l0aCB0aGUgb2JqZWN0aXZlIHRvIHJlZHVjZSBiaW5kaW5nLXVw ZGF0ZSBsYXRlbmN5IGFuZCBzaWduYWxpbmcgb3ZlcmhlYWQuIA0KDQpUd28gbmV3IEludGVybmV0 LURyYWZ0cyBhcmUgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGZyb20gdGhlIG9uLWxpbmUgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGRp cmVjdG9yaWVzIChzZWUgYmVsb3cpLg0KDQpXZSByZWNvZ25pemUgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvcG9zZWQg b3B0aW1pemF0aW9ucyBtYXkgYmUgb2YgaW50ZXJlc3QgZm9yIHRoZSBNSVA2IGFuZCB0aGUgTU9C T1BUUyBmb2xrcywgYW5kIHdlIHdvdWxkIGFwcHJlY2lhdGUgZmVlZGJhY2sgZnJvbSBwZW9wbGUg ZnJvbSBib3RoIGNvbW11bml0aWVzLiBJbiBhbiBhdHRlbXB0IHRvIGF2b2lkIGNyb3NzLXBvc3Rp bmdzLCB3ZSBzdWdnZXN0IHVzaW5nIHRoZSBNT0JPUFRTIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBhcyBhIGRpc2N1 c3Npb24gZm9ydW0uDQoNCkJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywNCg0KDQotIENocmlzdGlhbiAoVm9ndCkNCg0K DQorKysNCg0KVGl0bGUuLi4uOiBDcmVkaXQtQmFzZWQgQXV0aG9yaXphdGlvbg0KICAgICAgICAg ICBmb3IgTW9iaWxlIElQdjYgRWFybHkgQmluZGluZyBVcGRhdGVzDQpBdXRob3Iocyk6IEMuIFZv Z3QsIGV0IGFsLg0KRmlsZW5hbWUuOiBkcmFmdC12b2d0LW1pcHY2LWNyZWRpdC1iYXNlZC1hdXRo b3JpemF0aW9uLTAwLnR4dA0KUGFnZXMuLi4uOiA0Mw0KRGF0ZS4uLi4uOiAyMDA0LTUtMjENCg0K ICAgVGhlIGxhdGVuY3kgYXNzb2NpYXRlZCB3aXRoIE1vYmlsZSBJUHY2J3MgUmV0dXJuIFJvdXRh YmlsaXR5IHRlc3QNCiAgIGNhbiBoYXZlIGFuIGFkdmVyc2UgaW1wYWN0IG9uIGRlbGF5LXNlbnNp dGl2ZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMuICBFYXJseQ0KICAgQmluZGluZyBVcGRhdGVzIG1pdGlnYXRlIHRo aXMgaXNzdWUgYnkgYWxyZWFkeSB1c2luZyBhIG5ldyBjYXJlLW9mDQogICBhZGRyZXNzIGluIHBh cmFsbGVsIHdpdGggdGVzdGluZyBpdC4gIFdlIHByb3Bvc2UgYW5kIGFuYWx5emUgYQ0KICAgY3Jl ZGl0LWJhc2VkIG1lY2hhbmlzbSB0aGF0IHByZXZlbnRzIG1pc3VzZSBvZiBFYXJseSBCaW5kaW5n IFVwZGF0ZXMNCiAgIGZvciBhbXBsaWZpZWQgZmxvb2RpbmcgYXR0YWNrcyBhbmQgZGlzY291cmFn ZXMgc3VjaCBtaXN1c2UgZm9yDQogICBub24tYW1wbGlmaWVkIGZsb29kaW5nIGF0dGFja3MuDQoN CkEgVVJMIGZvciB0aGlzIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0IGlzOg0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9p bnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHMvZHJhZnQtdm9ndC1taXB2Ni1jcmVkaXQtYmFzZWQtYXV0aG9yaXphdGlv bi0wMC50eHQNCg0KKysrDQoNClRpdGxlLi4uLjogQ3JlZGl0LUJhc2VkIEF1dGhvcml6YXRpb24g Zm9yIEJpbmRpbmcgTGlmZXRpbWUgRXh0ZW5zaW9uDQpBdXRob3Iocyk6IEouIEFya2tvLCBDLiBW b2d0DQpGaWxlbmFtZS46IGRyYWZ0LWFya2tvLW1pcHY2LWJpbmRpbmctbGlmZXRpbWUtZXh0ZW5z aW9uLTAwLnR4dA0KUGFnZXMuLi4uOiAxNA0KRGF0ZS4uLi4uOiAyMDA0LTUtMjENCg0KICAgTW9i aWxlIElQdjYgcmV0dXJuIHJvdXRhYmlsaXR5IG1lY2hhbmlzbXMgcmVxdWlyZSBob21lIGFuZCBj YXJlLW9mDQogICBhZGRyZXNzIGtleWdlbiB0b2tlbnMgdG8gYmUgdXNlZCB0byBhdXRob3JpemUg YSBiaW5kaW5nIHVwZGF0ZSB0bw0KICAgY29ycmVzcG9uZGVudCBub2Rlcy4gVGhlIGN1cnJlbnQg cnVsZXMgZGljdGF0ZSB0aGF0IHN1Y2gNCiAgIGF1dGhvcml6YXRpb24gYmUgcGVyZm9ybWVkIGV2 ZXJ5IHNldmVuIG1pbnV0ZXMsIHVzaW5nIHRva2VucyBhdCBtb3N0DQogICB0aHJlZSBhbmQgaGFs ZiBtaW51dGVzIG9sZC4gVGhpcyByZXF1aXJlbWVudCByZXN1bHRzIGluIGFuIGF2ZXJhZ2UNCiAg IHNpZ25hbGluZyB0cmFmZmljIG9mIGFyb3VuZCA3IGJpdHMgcGVyIHNlY29uZCB3aGVuIHRoZSBo b3N0cyBhcmUgbm90DQogICBtb3ZpbmcgYXJvdW5kLiBUaGlzIHRyYWZmaWMgbG9hZCBieSBpdHNl bGYgaXMgbmVnbGlibGUsIGJ1dCBjYW4gYmUNCiAgIHByb2JsZW1hdGljIGZvciBob3N0cyBpbiBz dGFuZGJ5IG1vZGUuIFdlIHByZXNlbnQgYSBzZWN1cmUgYW5kDQogICBsaWdodHdlaWdodCBleHRl bnNpb24gb2YgcmV0dXJuIHJvdXRhYmlsaXR5IHRoYXQgY2FuIHJlZHVjZSB0aGlzDQogICBzaWdu YWxpbmcgbG9hZCB0byBhcm91bmQgMC4xIGJpdHMgcGVyIHNlY29uZCwgYW5kIHJlcXVpcmUgaG9z dHMgdG8NCiAgIHdha2UgdXAgbXVjaCBsZXNzIGZyZXF1ZW50bHkuDQoNCkEgVVJMIGZvciB0aGlz IEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0IGlzOg0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHMv ZHJhZnQtYXJra28tbWlwdjYtYmluZGluZy1saWZldGltZS1leHRlbnNpb24tMDAudHh0DQoNCisr Kw0K _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat May 22 07:45:01 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA01254 for ; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:45:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRUrl-0001uj-5G for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:40:38 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4MBebG3007357 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:40:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRUmb-0000pU-DN for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:35:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA00347 for ; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:35:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRUma-0001bS-Jn for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:35:16 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRUla-0001PA-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:34:15 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRUkj-0001E6-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:33:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRUec-0007ga-92; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:27:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRUSV-0005Ac-31 for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:14:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA29286 for ; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:14:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRUSU-0005sM-Jn for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:14:30 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRURX-0005gS-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:13:31 -0400 Received: from bundit.graduate.kmitl.ac.th ([161.246.39.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRUQV-0005Lv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sat, 22 May 2004 07:12:27 -0400 Received: from graduate.kmitl.ac.th ([161.246.39.95]) by bundit.graduate.kmitl.ac.th (8.12.8/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i4MB3OHK027131; Sat, 22 May 2004 18:03:26 +0700 Message-ID: <40AF356F.5010201@graduate.kmitl.ac.th> Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 18:11:43 +0700 From: Warodom Werapun User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030401 X-Accept-Language: th, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wassim Haddad , mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] BUB+ References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.75.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Graduate-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Graduate-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I haven't read MIP6 working for times. Now, does RR procedure still use? What 's the current Binding update method we should use? Regards, - Warodom Wassim Haddad wrote: >Hi all, > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > > > Title : Applying Cryptographically Generated Addresses > to BUB (BUB+) > Author(s) : W. Haddad, et al. > Filename : draft-haddad-mip6-cga-bub-00.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2004-5-19 > > This memo describes a method to exploit the Cryptographically > Generated Address (CGA) features in highly mobile environment. > The draft introduces a new optimization to the "Binding Update > Backhauling (BUB)" proposal, which eliminates the need for > running a return routability (RR) procedure at the beginning > and improves its security. > > >Comments are appreciated. > > >Regards, > >Wassim H. > >_______________________________________________ >Mip6 mailing list >Mip6@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 > > > _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 23 02:10:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA27666 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:10:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRm9j-0001J7-F2 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:08:28 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4N68Jf1005011 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:08:19 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRm8d-0000gx-34 for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:07:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA24175 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:07:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRm8Z-0007JT-76 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:07:07 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRm7c-00074j-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:06:09 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRm6k-0006qZ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:05:14 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRm2k-0007v7-Qh; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:01:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRm0k-0007Q3-JD for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 01:59:06 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA16943 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 01:59:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRm0h-0005U9-8z for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 01:58:59 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRlzi-0005GO-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 01:57:59 -0400 Received: from p2.piuha.net ([131.160.192.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRlye-0004qE-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 01:56:52 -0400 Received: from kolumbus.fi (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E9E8988D; Sun, 23 May 2004 08:56:46 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40B03C3F.7070104@kolumbus.fi> Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 08:53:03 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Warodom Werapun Cc: Wassim Haddad , mip6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Mip6] BUB+ References: <40AF356F.5010201@graduate.kmitl.ac.th> In-Reply-To: <40AF356F.5010201@graduate.kmitl.ac.th> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Warodom Werapun wrote: > I haven't read MIP6 working for times. Now, does RR procedure still > use? What 's the current Binding update method we should use? Return routability, as defined in the Mobile IPv6 base specification RFC (out in the next couple of days, I hope), is the current and mandatory-to-support method for authorizing route optimization signaling. A number of optional methods have been discussed in addition (BUG, preshared secrets draft by Charlie and so forth). --Jari _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 23 03:09:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02885 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:09:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRn4b-0005Lv-Nm for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:07:05 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4N775wJ020571 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:07:05 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRn3j-00057z-Rn for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:06:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02822 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:06:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRn3f-0005lj-N9 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:06:07 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRn2j-0005XZ-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:05:10 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRn1q-0005JC-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 03:04:15 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRmtt-0003II-RO; Sun, 23 May 2004 02:56:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQs5J-0005vV-Gt for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:16:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA08489 for ; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:15:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQs5G-0006ap-VH for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:15:59 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQs4X-0006Vv-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:15:14 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQs3J-0006Qx-00; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:13:57 -0400 Received: from zidane.cc.vt.edu (IDENT:mirapoint@evil-zidane [10.1.1.13]) by lennier.cc.vt.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i4KI9deh352804; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:09:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from TomXP.vt.edu (thoupc2.ece.vt.edu [128.173.52.68]) by zidane.cc.vt.edu (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with ESMTP id AUW53827; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:09:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.2.20040520140546.02f4b6a8@pop.vt.edu> X-Sender: hou@pop.vt.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.1.1 Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:09:19 -0400 To: Thomas Hou From: Thomas Hou Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_97908203==.ALT" X-Junkmail-Status: score=11/50, host=zidane.cc.vt.edu Subject: [Mip6] CALL FOR PAPERS: QShine 2004 - The First International Conference on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60 --=====================_97908203==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed CALL FOR PAPERS QShine 2004 - First International Conference on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks October 18-20, 2004, Dallas, TX, USA http://www.qshine.org/ Scope: ------------------------------- Recent technological developments in broadband high-speed networks, peer-to-peer networks, wireless and mobile networks, and grid computing have led to newer challenging problems, such as providing QoS support to the emerging high-speed Internet and multimedia applications across both wired and wireless networks. This conference will focus on all aspects of QoS support for heterogeneous wired and wireless networks. Papers addressing cross-layer design on QoS support for both wired and wireless networks are strongly encouraged. It will serve as a forum for researchers from both academia and industry for presenting recent research results in QoS issues for both wired and wireless networks. The conference features prominent invited speakers as well as papers by top researchers in the field. The scope of the conference includes, but is not limited to: - QoS in wireless local area networks - QoS in sensor networks and wireless ad-hoc networks - QoS support and mobility management in wireless Internet - QoS in wireless and mobile multimedia - QoS provisioning in mobile IP and IPv6 - Scheduling policies for wireless networks - QoS in current and emerging cellular and satellite networks - Differentiated service in wireless multimedia networks - QoS in broadband high-speed networks - QoS in optical networks - QoS support for Internet applications - QoS across heterogeneous link technologies - Middleware support for QoS provision - Policy-based QoS differentiation - Interactive broadband television, gaming, and video distribution - Variable and adaptive QoS - QoS modeling and measurement - QoS routing, resource management, and admission control - QoS pricing and billing - QoS architectures, protocols, and systems - QoS in web systems and storage systems - QoS specification, metrics, and analysis - QoS in peer-to-peer networks, grid and application-layer overlay networks - Security aspects of QoS systems Accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings. Papers of particular merit will be proposed for publication in ACM / Kluwer Wireless Networks (WINET). Submission Guidelines: ------------------------------- Papers should not exceed 20 pages, must be unpublished and must not be submitted for publication elsewhere. All submissions should be sent electronically in Postscript or Adobe PDF format. Electronic submission instructions will be available at http://www.qshine.org/. Important Dates: -------------------------------- Submission Deadline: May 28, 2004 Notification of Acceptance: July 26, 2004 Camera-ready Manuscripts Due: August 20, 2004 Conference Dates: October 18-20, 2004 Organizing Committee --------------------------------- General Chair: Azzedine Boukerche, University of Ottawa, Canada, Vice Chair: Michael Fang, University of Florida Technical Program Co-Chairs Jorge Cobb, University of Texas at Dallas Shigang Chen, University of Florida Steering Committee Chair: Imrich Chlamtac, University of Texas at Dallas Publicity Co-Chairs: Mirela Sechi M. Annoni Notare, Barddal University, Brazil Thomas Hou, Virginia Tech Local Chair & Finance Chair: Hua Zhu, University of Texas at Dallas --=====================_97908203==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

CALL FOR PAPERS
QShine 2004 - First International Conference on
Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks
October 18-20, 2004, Dallas, TX, USA
http://www.qshine.org/
 
Scope:
-------------------------------
Recent technological developments in broadband high-speed networks, peer-to-peer networks, wireless and mobile networks, and grid computing have led to newer challenging problems, such as providing QoS support to the emerging high-speed Internet and multimedia applications across both wired and wireless networks.
This conference will focus on all aspects of QoS support for heterogeneous wired and wireless networks. Papers addressing cross-layer design on QoS support for both wired and wireless networks are strongly encouraged. It will serve as a forum for researchers from both academia and industry for presenting recent research results in QoS issues for both wired and wireless networks. The conference features prominent invited speakers as well as papers by top researchers in the field.

The scope of the conference includes, but is not limited to:

- QoS in wireless local area networks
- QoS in sensor networks and wireless ad-hoc networks
- QoS support and mobility management in wireless Internet
- QoS in wireless and mobile multimedia
- QoS provisioning in mobile IP and IPv6
- Scheduling policies for wireless networks
- QoS in current and emerging cellular and satellite networks
- Differentiated service in wireless multimedia networks
- QoS in broadband high-speed networks
- QoS in optical networks
- QoS support for Internet applications
- QoS across heterogeneous link technologies
- Middleware support for QoS provision
- Policy-based QoS differentiation
- Interactive broadband television, gaming, and video distribution
- Variable and adaptive QoS
- QoS modeling and measurement
- QoS routing, resource management, and admission control
- QoS pricing and billing
- QoS architectures, protocols, and systems
- QoS in web systems and storage systems
- QoS specification, metrics, and analysis
- QoS in peer-to-peer networks, grid and application-layer overlay networks
- Security aspects of QoS systems

Accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings. Papers of particular merit will be proposed for publication in ACM / Kluwer Wireless Networks (WINET).

Submission Guidelines:
-------------------------------
Papers should not exceed 20 pages, must be unpublished and must not be submitted for publication elsewhere. All submissions should be sent electronically in Postscript or Adobe PDF format. Electronic submission instructions will be available at http://www.qshine.org/.

Important Dates:
--------------------------------
Submission Deadline:    May 28, 2004
Notification of Acceptance:     July 26, 2004
Camera-ready Manuscripts Due:   August 20, 2004
Conference Dates:       October 18-20, 2004

Organizing Committee
---------------------------------
General Chair:
        Azzedine Boukerche, University of Ottawa, Canada,

Vice Chair:
        Michael Fang, University of Florida

Technical Program Co-Chairs
        Jorge Cobb, University of Texas at Dallas       
        Shigang Chen, University of Florida

Steering Committee Chair:
        Imrich Chlamtac, University of Texas at Dallas

Publicity Co-Chairs:
        Mirela Sechi M. Annoni Notare, Barddal University, Brazil
        Thomas Hou, Virginia Tech

Local Chair & Finance Chair:
        Hua Zhu, University of Texas at Dallas  


        
--=====================_97908203==.ALT-- _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6 From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun May 23 19:10:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13151 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:10:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BS24n-0004zG-2n for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:08:18 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4NN8HJt019169 for mip6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:08:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BS23l-0004az-DN for mip6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:07:13 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA12934 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:07:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BS23i-0006xj-1g for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:07:10 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BS21Z-0006SG-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:04:58 -0400 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BS214-0006Be-00 for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:04:26 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BS1yk-0003oy-BA; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:02:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BS1wg-0003Rf-Cq for mip6@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 18:59:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA12657 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 18:59:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BS1wd-00055J-5b for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 18:59:51 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BS1vf-0004ph-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 18:58:52 -0400 Received: from waga.cysol.co.jp ([210.233.3.228]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BS1v3-0004aO-00 for mip6@ietf.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 18:58:13 -0400 Received: from aso.priv.cysol.co.jp (aso.priv.cysol.co.jp [192.168.0.15]) by waga.cysol.co.jp (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4NMvsmP022072; Mon, 24 May 2004 07:57:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from cysols.com (guest213.priv.cysol.co.jp [192.168.0.213]) by aso.priv.cysol.co.jp (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4NMvmAS011180; Mon, 24 May 2004 07:57:53 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <40B12C4E.8030304@cysols.com> Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 07:57:18 +0900 From: Glenn Mansfield Keeni Organization: Cyber Solutions Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mip6@ietf.org, KOIDE Kazuhide , Ken Nagami , Sri Gundavelli X-Enigmail-Version: 0.83.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------060102070507010102070409" Subject: [Mip6] Re I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt Sender: mip6-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mip6-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060102070507010102070409 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, The latest mipv6-mib draft has been posted. Title : A Management Information Base for Mobile IPv6 Author(s) : G. Keeni, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt Pages : 80 Date : 2004-5-17 A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt Let us have feedback on this. The points that we are expecting feedback on, are - o the adequacy of the MOs Do we need more read objects (dials) ? Do we need more write objects (knobs) ? Are there any objects that are redundant (there is little interest in those dials/knobs) ? o the names of the MOs Are the MO names intuitive and short ? o the descriptions of the MOs Are the descriptions precise and unambiguous ? o the tables and their indices Are the tables and the indices logical and useful ? o anything else ? I have prepared an abstract of the MIB it is attached below. This will help you have a quick glance at the essentials of the MIB. But I would strongly recommend reading the draft. Glenn --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Legends -R-- is for read-only objects -RW- is for read-write objects Index lists the MOs that are used as key for the entries in Table c = 32 bit counters C = 64 bit counters i = 32 bit integer signed u = 32 bit integer unsigned g = 32 bit gauge F = enumerated object: one of [xxxx | yyyy] one or more of {aaaa, bbbb, cccc} T = TimeStamp in deci seconds (since system startup) D = Date and Time A = IPv6 Address Note: every mipv6XXXXXXXAddress MO in the MIB is preceeded by a mipv6XXXXXXXAddressType MO The AddressType MOs are not shown in the chart below the '(N)' following the MO name indicates OID of the MO relative to the parent OID. For detailed descriptions of the MOs and for conformance rules refer to the MobileIPv6 MIB definition in the draft. ^L Chart of MOs in the MIPv6 MIB +-----------------------------+ Notifications that will be sent by the HA. ========================================== +--mipv6MnRegistered(1) +--mipv6MnDeRegistered(2) +--mipv6MnMoved(3) +--mipv6MnBindingExpiredAtHA(4) Notifications that will be sent by the CN ========================================== +--mipv6MnBindingExpiredAtCN(5) The Core Objects =========================================== | +-- -R-- F mipv6Capabilities(1) {mobileNode(0),homeAgent(1),correspondentNode(2)} +-- -RW- F mipv6Status(2) [enabled(1) | disabled(2)] Binding Cache ============= | Index: mipv6BindingHomeAddress, +-- ---- A mipv6BindingHomeAddress(2) +-- -R-- A mipv6BindingCOA(4) +-- -R-- D mipv6BindingTimeRegistered(5) +-- -R-- g mipv6BindingTimeGranted(6) +-- -R-- g mipv6BindingTimeRemaining(7) +-- -R-- F mipv6BindingHomeRegn(8) [true(1) | false(2)] +-- -R-- u mipv6BindingMaxSeq(9) +-- -R-- D mipv6BindingUsageTS(10) -> Timestamp of last lookup +-- -R-- c mipv6BindingUsageCount(11) -> Number of lookups +-- -RW- F mipv6BindingAdminStatus(12) [active(1) | inactive(2)] Binding Cache History Table =========================== | Index: mipv6BindingHstHomeAddress, mipv6BindingHstIndex +-- ---- A mipv6BindingHstHomeAddress(2) +-- -R-- A mipv6BindingHstCOA(4) +-- ---- u mipv6BindingHstIndex(5) +-- -R-- D mipv6BindingHstTimeRegistered(6) +-- -R-- D mipv6BindingHstTimeExpired(7) +-- -R-- F mipv6BindingHstHomeRegn(8) [true(1) | false(2)] +-- -R-- D mipv6BindingHstUsageTS(9) +-- -R-- u mipv6BindingHstUsageCount(10) Total-Traffic counters ===================== +-- -R-- c mipv6InOctets(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6HCInOctets(2) +-- -R-- c mipv6InPkts(3) +-- -R-- c mipv6HCInPkts(4) +-- -R-- c mipv6OutOctets(5) +-- -R-- c mipv6HCOutOctets(6) +-- -R-- c mipv6OutPkts(7) +-- -R-- c mipv6HCOutPkts(8) +-- -R-- T mipv6CounterDiscontinuityTime(9) Node wise Traffic counters Table ================================ | Index: mipv6BindingHomeAddress +-- -R-- c mipv6NodeInOctets(1) +-- -R-- C mipv6HCNodeInOctets(2) +-- -R-- c mipv6NodeInPkts(3) +-- -R-- C mipv6HCNodeInPkts(4) +-- -R-- c mipv6NodeOutOctets(5) +-- -R-- C mipv6HCNodeOutOctets(6) +-- -R-- c mipv6NodeOutPkts(7) +-- -R-- C mipv6HCNodeOutPkts(8) +-- -R-- T mipv6NodeCtrDiscontinuityTime(9) ^L Mobile node Specific Objects ============================ Home Address Table ================== | Index: mipv6MnHomeAddress +-- ---- A mipv6MnHomeAddress(2) +-- -R-- F mipv6MnHomeAddressState(3) [unknown(1)| home(2)| registered(3)| pending(4)| isolated(5)] Discovery & Advertisements Counters =================================== +-- -R-- c mipv6MnDiscoveryRequests(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnDiscoveryReplies(2) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnDiscoveryTimeouts(3) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnPrefixSolicitationsSent(4) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnPrefixAdvsRecd(5) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnPrefixAdvsIgnored(6) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnMovedToFN(7) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnMovedToHN(8) Binding List Table ================== | Index: mipv6MnBLNodeAddress, mipv6MnHomeAddress +-- ---- A mipv6MnBLNodeAddress(2) +-- ---- A mipv6MnBLCOA(4) +-- -R-- u mipv6MnBLLifeTimeRequested(5) +-- -R-- u mipv6MnBLLifeTimeGranted(6) +-- -R-- u mipv6MnBLMaxSeq(7) +-- -R-- D mipv6MnBLTimeSent(8) +-- -R-- F mipv6MnBLAccepted(9) [true(1) | false(2)] +-- -R-- D mipv6MnBLAcceptedTime(10) +-- -R-- i mipv6MnBLRetransmissions(11) Registration Counters ===================== +-- -R-- c mipv6MnMobilityMessagesSent(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnMobilityMessagesRecd(2) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnBUsToHA(3) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnBUAcksFromHA(4) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnBUsToCN(5) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnBUAcksFromCN(6) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnBindingErrorsFromCN(7) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnICMPErrorsRecd(8) +-- -R-- c mipv6MnBRRequestsRecd(9) ^L Correspondent node Specific Objects =================================== Global Statistics ================= +-- -R-- c mipv6CnHomeTestInitsRecd(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnHomeTestsSent(2) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnCareOfTestInitsRecd(3) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnCareOfTestsSent(4) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBUsRecd(5) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBUAcksSent(6) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBRsSent(7) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBindingErrors(8) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBUsAccepted(9) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBUsRejected(10) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnReasonUnspecified(11) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnInsufficientResource(12) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnHomeRegnNotSupported(13) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnSeqNumberOutOfWindow(14) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnExpiredHomeNonceIndex(15) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnExpiredCareOfNonceIndex(16) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnExpiredNonce(17) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnRegTypeChangeDisallowed(18) Mobile Node-wise statistics Table ================================= | Index: mipv6BindingHomeAddress +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBURequestsAccepted(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6CnBURequestsRejected(2) +-- -R-- D mipv6CnBCEntryCreationTime(3) +-- -R-- D mipv6CnBUAcceptedTime(4) +-- -R-- D mipv6CnBURejectionTime(5) +-- -R-- F mipv6CnBURejectionCode(6) [Mipv6BURequestRejectionCode] +-- -R-- T mipv6CnCtrDiscontinuityTime(7) ^L Home Agent Specific Objects =========================== Advertisement Counters ====================== +-- -R-- c mipv6HaAdvsRecd(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaAdvsSent(2) Homa Agent Configuration Table ============================== | Index: ipv6IfIndex +-- -RW- i mipv6HaAdvPreference(1) +-- -RW- i mipv6HaAdvLifetime(2) +-- -RW- F mipv6HaPrefixAdv(3) [enabled(1)| disabled(2)] +-- -RW- F mipv6HaPrefixSolicitation(4) [enabled(1)| disabled(2)] +-- -RW- F mipv6HaMCastCtlMsgSupport(5) [enabled(1)| disabled(2)] Home Agent List Table ===================== | Index: ipv6IfIndex, mipv6HaLinkLocalAddress +-- ---- A mipv6HaLinkLocalAddress(2) +-- -R-- i mipv6HaPreference(3) +-- -R-- g mipv6HaRecvLifeTime(4) +-- -R-- D mipv6HaRecvTimeStamp(5) Home Agent Global Address Table =============================== | Index: ipv6IfIndex, mipv6HaLinkLocalAddress, mipv6HaGaAddrSeqNo +-- ---- i mipv6HaGaAddrSeqNo(1) +-- -R-- A mipv6HaGaGlobalAddress(3) Home Agent Global Statistics ============================ | +-- -R-- c mipv6HaHomeTestInitsRecd(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaHomeTestsSent(2) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaBUsRecd(3) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaBUAcksSent(4) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaBRAdviceSent(5) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaBUsAccepted(6) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaPrefDiscoverReqd(7) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaReasonUnspecified(8) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaAdmProhibited(9) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaInsufficientResource(10) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaHomeRegnNotSupported(11) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaNotHomeSubnet(12) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaNotHomeAgentForThisMN(13) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaDupAddrDetectionFailed(14) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaSeqNumberOutOfWindow(15) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaExpiredHomeNonceIndex(16) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaExpiredCareOfNonceIndex(17) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaExpiredNonce(18) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaRegTypeChangeDisallowed(19) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaEncapsUnavailable(20) Home Agent mobile node-wise Statistics table ============================================ | Index: mipv6BindingHomeAddress +-- -R-- c mipv6HaBURequestsAccepted(1) +-- -R-- c mipv6HaBURequestsDenied(2) +-- -R-- D mipv6HaBCEntryCreationTime(3) +-- -R-- D mipv6HaBUAcceptedTime(4) +-- -R-- D mipv6HaBURejectionTime(5) +-- -R-- F mipv6HaRecentBURejectionCode(6) [Mipv6BURequestRejectionCode] +-- -R-- T mipv6HaCtrDiscontinuityTime(7) --------------060102070507010102070409 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="draft-ietf-mip6-mipv6-mib-02.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2004-5-17155938.I-D@ietf.org> --------------060102070507010102070409-- _______________________________________________ Mip6 mailing list Mip6@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6