> I presume another UI option that would be desirable on a
> mobile node is
> a "privacy" switch that prevents binding updates from being sent, and
> also tunnels mobile->correspondent packets via the home agent, so as
> not to reveal the current (network) location to correspondents. When
> operating in such a mode, the performance impact of having
> all of one's
> packets dogleg-routed through the home agent might be very
> undesirable,
> especially when the mobile and correspondent are on one continent and
> the home agent is on another.
This is a good idea, but I don't recall any text in the mobility spec that
talks about the mobile sending packets to the correspondent by tunneling to
the home agent. (The tunneling right now is in the other direction.) I think
it would be a simple addition.
> Another possible reason for user-specified use of the COA
> address instead
> of the home address is to be able to communicate even when
> the the user's
> home agent(s) are down or unreachable for whatever reason.
Certainly, I would hate to be in a position where I can't talk to a local
service because my home agent happens be to unreachable at the moment. But
if the binding cache on the local server is working well enough to maintain
the binding, and the mobile node sends a binding-update proactively with its
SYN, then the home agent won't be needed. This should be the common case
when the mobile node is initiating the communication.
Rich
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
