1 / 8

Proxy Mobile IPv6

Proxy Mobile IPv6. draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6-11.txt. 1. 1. 1. IETF 71: NETLMM Working Group – Proxy Mobile IPv6. Document Status. The -11 version of the document was published in February. This document is now under IESG review

sloan
Télécharger la présentation

Proxy Mobile IPv6

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6-11.txt 1 1 1 IETF 71: NETLMM Working Group – Proxy Mobile IPv6

  2. Document Status • The -11 version of the document was published in February. This document is now under IESG review • Earlier, the IETF Last Call was issued on -09 version of the document and the subsequent two revisions were primarily for addressing the issues that came out of the Gen-ART review, missing comments from the AD review, fixing typos and nits identified by the WG

  3. Gen-ART Review Comments • Elwyn Davies from the General Area Review Team reviewed the document from the perspective of a general reader and provided some comments. • Bi-Directional Tunnel Setup and related clarifications • Remove “M” flag from the PBA, not specified in 4140 • Expand Acronyms used in the document • Explanations around Per-MN-Prefix and Shared-Prefix models • Access Technology Type Registry and IANA considerations • Emphasize the pivotal role of MN-Identity > Version 11 addressed the issues and the reviewer was satisfied with the changes

  4. Transport Directorate – Review Comments 1. MTU issues with PMIP. As raised by Allison Mankin in her review there exist a MTU issue here. Both from the general problem of tunnels, but secondly also from the potential for changed access technology in the access link and the path between the MAG and LMA. Both needs to be discussed in the document. 2. ECN. I expect that one at least raise the issue of ECN with tunnel and point at RFC 3168. We seem to be lacking that generic document that contains all known issues and recommended practices with IP tunnels.

  5. Transport Directorate Review - Response • After each handoff, the MAG in the RA messages MUST include the MTU option. • The MTU size in the option will reflect the MTU size for that access technology and also the PMTU between the LMA and MAG, which ever has the lower value. • The MAG can discover the tunnel PMTU between the MAG and the LMA by using the standard ICMP PMTU discovery mechanisms. Optionally, this value may be manually configured by the operator on all the MAG’s in that Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. • Requirement on copying the ECN code point from the outer header to the inner header. However, we leverage RFC-2473 tunnel encapsulation mode and the ECN requirements should be specified there. • The issue is identical to the Mobile IPv4, when the MN hands-off from one FA to the other.

  6. DHCP WG Chair - Review Comments • Ralph Droms reviewed the document from the DHCP and Address management perspective and provided some technical comments • “The mapping between MNs and prefixes, in the Per-MN-Prefix model, is managed elsewhere in the LMAs. Therefore, by the time any requests get to the DHCPv6 server, there will only be one MN per prefix, which implies that there will be no competition for addresses assigned from that prefix, and there is no need to worry about address reclamation as in the last bullet in the section” • “The important issue is that the interaction with the client must be consistent regarding the lease on the assigned address, which might be accomplished by a group of coordinated servers rather than a single server”

  7. Implementations • Based on the posted responses in the mailing list, it appears the following vendors have early implementations of Proxy Mobile IPv6 base specification • Korea University of Technology • WIDE Implementation based on SHISA • Cisco Implementation on IOS

  8. Thank You

More Related