Re: [MEXT] using MR-HA tunnel vs. combining BU // Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd-01.txt

[Julien Laganier <julien.laganier.ietf at googlemail.com>]

Hello Ryuji,

On Thursday 11 December 2008, Ryuji Wakikawa wrote:
>
> Actually, it's not only 3 round trip and is not optimization
> problem.. This is a big issue of DHCP-PD.
>
> Let me explain the issue clearly.
>
> According to the NEMO-DHCP-PD spec, before receiving a prefix,
> a mobile router must create a tunnel with its HA.

There would be no issue at all with the MR being configured as both a 
DHCP client and relay, and the HA as a DHCP server: the DHCP messages 
would be unicasted bewteen MR and HA without tunneling.

I thought that was what we agreed on and I'm seeing now the draft still 
talks about multicasting into the tunnel...

I think the tunneling story (Sec. 3.2) should be removed from the draft, 
and the DHCP relay configuration mode made the mandatory method for a 
NEMO MR to obtain a prefix dynamically, i.e. put a couple of SHOULD 
words here and there in Sec. 3.3.

--julien
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext