Re: [MEXT] [WGLC] draft-ietf-mext-flow-binding-03

[George Tsirtsis <tsirtsis at googlemail.com>]

Hi Yuri,

Comments inline...

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Yuri Ismailov
<yuri.ismailov at ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> after re-reading the draft come up with the comment on "Discard" action in
> "Flow Identification Mobility Option"
> I suggest either to extend the paragraph in the section 4.2 or add a
> separate subsection clarifying behavior of MN and HA before and after the
> "Discard" action was issued by MN.
>
> Below are the issues which are proposed to be addressed in the text.
>
> 1.The case when installed FID represent ranges of port numbers and IP
> addresses. If MN decides to discard a particular flow within the range then
> before that a correspondent FID should be installed in the HA. Otherwise
> "136 FID not found" will be returned from HA.
>

GT> If the MN wants to discard a particular flow within a range of
previously registered flows, it needs to either split the range it two
parts, or even better, use a higher FID-PRI for the  discard flow so
that packets get matched against it before they get matched against
the range.

> 2. Specify the time interval for how long time the "Discard" state will be
> active in HA. This is necessary because there is no "un-discard" message
> sent from MN.
>

GT> Flow bindings share the same lifetime with the BU. There is no
flow binding-specific lifetime. If an MN wants to remove a flow
binding it sends a BU which does not include the corresponding FID.

> 3. Add a disclaimer that for some protocols, like TCP, "Discard" action may
> lead to hanging up the connection at CN and should be used responsibly.
>

GT> Discarding packets will drop connections....yes...I do not think
there is anything to say here.

>
> Regards
> Yuri
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> MEXT at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>
>