> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
 > > The real problem here seems to be that MIP6 (and 
 > associated protocols
 > > such as NEMO), for good or bad, has chosen the path of 
 > being part of the
 > > IP layer rather than running at the transport layer. Since 
 > the mapping
 > > of filter rules to addresses (not defining or exchanging the rules
 > > itself, but, the mapping) is very much part of a handoff 
 > problem, it
 > > needs to be integrated with the protocol for optimal 
 > operation during
 > > handoffs. One option on the table is the use of mobility 
 > options (which
 > > is an option to the Mobility Header, which is also an IPv6 
 > extension
 > > header) - that would make this applicable only to the MIP6 class of
 > > protocols. If we want MOBIKE or Shim6 to be able to use it, I was
 > > suggesting looking into defining its own IPv6 extension 
 > header, since
 > > that can be carried in any of these protocols (except 
 > MOBIKE over IPv4).
 > 
 > If I recall correctly, the issue of piggybacking arbitrary data on 
 > signalling messages was deferred from MIPv6 specifications, 
 > and hasn't 
 > been solved in later extensions or other protocols either. 

=> Correct, it was actually deliberately removed from the spec for good
reasons IMO.

This is 
 > likely to bring up issues with different application PDU 
 > sizes, PMTUD, 
 > etc.
 > 
 > Maybe filter signalling is sufficiently more restricted case of 
 > piggybacking arbitrary data that devising framing, PMTUD, 

=> It's not actually piggybacking in the case of MIPv6, it's part of the
mobility header itself.

Hesham

 > etc. for it 
 > is simpler.  I might agree with that if the filters were 
 > restricted to 
 > be (say) less than 500 bytes so that no fragmentation was never 
 > needed.
 > 
 > While solving the more general problem might be useful, it's 
 > not clear 
 > to me yet whether the requirements in this mobility space are strong 
 > enough to preclude using a more generic transport protocol.
 > 
 > -- 
 > Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
 > Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
 > Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Int-area mailing list
 > [email protected]
 > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
 > 



_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to