Thierry Ernst writes:
 > >    This is mostly a mipv6 issue, but suppose you have:
 > > 
 > >    MN------->MR------------------------>CN
 > > 
 > >    When the mobile node moves, it sends a BU to the CN.
 > >    When the mobile router moves, it too sends a BU to the CN.
 > 
 > This is only your scenario.   You could think of any scenario you want. 
 > Anyway, this is something I have already raised in the MIP WG and this
 > is presumably a case where MIPv6 would fail.

   I'm aware that this is only my scenario, but this is
   what I think a naive implementation would do. Ie,
   the mobile router would think it's supposed to send
   a BU when it see something come in from its home agent
   tunnel interface, the MN (or another MR) would
   think it's supposed to send a BU...

 > >    The CN now has a binding entry for both the mobile node
 > >    and the mobile router in its cache. Now if this
 > >    is going to work at all (which I think is the $64
 > >    "if") CN would need to construct a packet like:
 > 
 > But, first, why should the CN get two BUs ?  The CN is not a CN for the
 > MR. 

   If the MR subtends a prefix and can send a BU
   which is legal in -13 as you know, it would 
   send a BU when it sees the packet on the HA
   interface. Otherwise, you'd have triangular
   routing at the MR.

     Unless you refer to my draft 
 > 
 >http://www.inrialpes.fr/planete/people/ernst/Documents/draft-ernst-mobileip-v6-network.txt
 > which proposes that the MR be in charge of all the mobility management
 > of the mobile network.

   Well, I think that we probably need to look at
   the induction from 1 to n otherwise the
   diagrams keep getting harder to parse each
   time we have to go through this :-)

 > Then, your issue is rather a proposal for a solution, and it would be
 > better if you could first specify your solution, this would highly
 > highlight the issue you are trying to discuss.

   I'm not trying to propose anything, actually. I'm just
   pointing out that the current set of drafts won't
   work as they are currently stated to more than
   one level of mobility.

             Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to