> > => Your understanding is correct, but I disagree with the > > conclusion (if the above is a conclusion). It's clear > > to me (and many) that there are security hazards associated > > with the HAO (thanks to your draft). But rather than redefining > > mobility, or relaxing the requirements on mobility, I think > > we should work on something that fixes the problem. > > So my point is, let's fix the problem instead of redefining > > the original goal. Breaking connections was always a no no ! > > You're right, I that wasn't a conclusion. I only tried to > enumerate the > dependencies and needs for BU and HAO. A conclusion seems > to be that > without HAO,
=> OK, and just to be a bit pedantic :), I would say that without some form of tunnelling (e.g. the HAO) we can not get true mobility. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
