A few clarifying questions: 1. Would all the MAGs across different PMIP6 domains be required to use the same LLA and IID? As per the proposal a single LLA and IID are being reserved for use by PMIP6 MAGs.
2. Is it mandatory for the MAGs in a PMIP6 domain to use this LLA and IID? Or is it simply a recommendation. Network configuration tools and protocols can ensure that the same LLA and IID is configured across all MAGs in a PMIP6 domain. Hence assigning a specific LLA and IID is unnecessary. 3. When a MAG is provisioned it needs to be associated with an LMA and a security association configured between the MAG and LMA. As a part of that process, the MAG could obtain the LLA and IID to be used from the LMA itself. Would this approach not be sufficient? -Basavaraj On 12/13/11 2:50 AM, "ext Jari Arkko" <[email protected]> wrote: >The new version of this draft looks good to me: >http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-r >eservations-04.txt > >Ready to be approved? > >Jari > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >[email protected] >Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >-------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
