>>> >>> 1. Regarding the definition of “fixed IP address” in the draft: >>> >>> “- Fixed IP Address >>> This is what standard Mobile IP provides with a Home Address (HoA). >>> The mobile host is configures a HoA from a centrally-located Home >>> Network. Both IP session continuity and IP address reachability are >>> provided to the mobile host with the help of a router in the Home >>> Network (Home Agent, HA). This router acts as an anchor for the IP >>> address of the mobile host.” >>> >>> If this is equal to HoA, then RFC5014 already cover that. We do not need to >>> repeat it here with another name. >>> >> >> >> This is not equal to "HoA". >> This is equal to "HoA permanently allocated on a HA in the core network" >> (as opposed to "HoA temporarily allocated on a HA in the access network") >> > The draft says: “This is what standard Mobile IP provides with a Home Address > (HoA)...” If it is not equal to HoA, need clarification in the draft. >>
Draft says "This is what standard Mobile IP provides with a Home Address (HoA). The mobile host is configures a HoA from a centrally-located Home Network. " If this is not clear enough, we can certainly elaborate more on that in the I-D. >>> 2. Regarding the definition of “sustained IP address” in the draft: >>> >>> "- Sustained IP Address >>> >>> This type of IP address provides IP session continuity but not IP >>> address reachability. It is achieved by ensuring that the IP address >>> used at the beginning of the session remains usable despite the >>> movement of the mobile host. The IP address may change after the >>> termination of the IP session(s), therefore it does not exhibit >>> persistence. >>> " >>> There is no clear dividing line between fixed IP address and sustained IP >>> address. Whether the IP address is used for reachability is not determined >>> by the IP address itself. For example, even when the MN get a HoA, after it >>> moves to another location of the network, it may decide to release current >>> HoA and get another HoA, in this case the "fixed IP address" becomes a >>> "sustained IP address". >>> >> >> If the IP stack on the host releases the IP address, then of course it's not >> a "fixed IP address". >> Please see the definitions of these terms in the I-D. >> >> >>> Further more, the reachability normally is implemented by domain name >>> instead of IP address. For example, we reach “Google” by its domain name, >>> never by it’s server’s IP address. >>> >>> Using temporary private IP address we can also achieve the goal of >>> “reachability”. For example, using dynamic DNS, as shown in >>> http://hsk.oray.com/ , it can provide reachability even the host get a >>> private IP address. >>> >> >> You had said this before, and I had explained it. >> Nevertheless, let me recap: >> You cannot ensure an ongoing IP flow continues w/o interruption if you >> simply rely on dynamic DNS. Ongoing flows break even if you update the DNS. >> Furthermore, even if you ignore the ongoing flows, also note that DNS >> clients have a cache, hence a dynamic DNS update cannot be instantaneously >> reflected on the hosts. >> So, you cannot provide full mobility solution by relying on dynamic DNS. >> >> > The point here is “reachability” instead of “mobility”. > Further more, even mobile IP may lost some packet during handover. Not sure if this point has any impact on the discussion. >>> 3. Regarding the definition of “nomadic IP address”: >>> >>> “- Nomadic IP Address >>> This type of IP address provides neither IP session continuity nor IP >>> address reachability. The IP address is obtained from the serving IP >>> gateway and it is not maintained across gateway changes. In other >>> words, the IP address may be released and replaced by a new IP >>> address when the IP gateway changes due to the movement of the mobile >>> host.” >>> >>> Seems this IP address is the IP address that we normally used in most >>> cases. If this is the case, why we need a new name for it? >>> >> >> >> If you don't name it, how would you refer to it in this context? > If the justification of naming IP address as “fixed IP” and “ sustained IP” > is not valid, then we may not necessary need a new name for normal IP address. > I and the WT#1 believe that justification is valid. If you believe otherwise, please elaborate. Alper > > Dapeng >> >> >> Alper >> >> >>> >>> -- >>> Dapeng Liu >>> >>> 在 2015年3月25日 星期三，下午2:02，Alper Yegin 写道： >>> >>>> Hello Dapeng and Alex, >>>> >>>> I hope you had a chance to digest our responses to your comments and >>>> questions about the API work. >>>> If you have any remaining issues, please let us know over the email at >>>> your earliest convenience. >>>> It'd be good if you can articulate them in detail. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Alper >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
