> >My guess is that it will just effectively mean people will not > >use multiple prefixes for mobile nodes. > > i guess so too, and therefore, i don't feel a need to provide > special hack in DAD. it is not a protocol issue, but an operational > matter. >
I agree that we don't need to change DAD here. Doing multiple DAD messages (one per home address) should be in the noise from a performance perspective. If there is a concern that a mobile node shouldn't need to send multiple binding updates, then I think that concern applies to both having multiple prefixes on the home link as well as using RFC 3041 home addresses (and presumably DHCPv6 assigned home addresses as well). With RFC 3041 a host will by default have 7 home addresses - 6 deprecated and 1 preferred temporary address - plus whatever stable (non-temporary) home addresses it has. Allowing for a single BU to the home agent with RFC 3041 home addresses requires that the home agent to maintain the set of home address each mobile node is using and e.g. treat a BU for any address in the set as applying to the whole set. The current mechanism (with ICMP Mobile Prefix Solicitation/Advertisement) only allows the HA to guess the set of home addresses when stateless address conf is used. So perhaps this part of the protocol should be extended with explicit messages from the MN to HA to indicate which home addresses it is using. Then one can always do a single BU independent of how many home addresses a mobile node is using, and idependently of how the MN has acquired those home addresses. My 2 cents, Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
