Hello Thomas,

> Consider the comparatively easy configuration where MIP is using
> global addresses for everything, but both sites happen to use SLs for
> some of their own internal stuff. When the MN needs to send an IP
> packet to a particular address, and it is a SL address, where does it
> send it?  should it:
>
> - tunnel it back through the Home Agent? (I.e., assume the address is
>   for a node at its home site)
>
> - send the packet locally (i.e, assume the packet is for a node on the
>   local site)

What if the rule is that the mobile node tunnels when it is away
from home, and sends the packet locally when it is deregistered
and attached to its home network?  I don't see the case where
that isn't a reasonable thing to do.

Our current restriction is that a mobile node that uses a site-local
home address also must have a site-local care-of address when
using that address.  I think this eliminates the problem entirely.

> Note that a fundamental assumption (at least in my mind) is that when
> one uses MIPv6, everything should "just work". SLs seem to introduce
> some problems here.

So far, when we have had problems, we have made restrictions
(as just noted) so that indeed Mobile IPv6 just works.  Sometimes
the restrictions could be lifted by specifying additional protocol, but
at this point the amount of additional protocol is to be reduced,
even at the cost of some restriction.

I hope this resolves the issue.

Regards,
Charlie P.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
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