[Mip4] WG last call follow-up for vpn traversal problem statement
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Mip4] WG last call follow-up for vpn traversal problem statement
During the WG last call period for
draft-ietf-mobileip-vpn-problem-statement-req-03 I received one comment,
essentially saying that the choice of the words 'in parallel' in section
2.2 was less than optimal. Accordingly, I'd like to get your comments on
the following change (in the section title and first paragraph):
FROM:
2.2 VPN Gateway and MIPv4 HA(s) in parallel
A MIPv4 HA is deployed in parallel with the VPN gateway, and it is
directly reachable by MNs inside or outside the Intranet.
..Foreign Network.. .....VPN Domain..(Intranet).....
. . . .
. +----+ +----+ . +----+ +-------+ .
. |MNs | | FA | . | VPN| | Router| .
. |away| | | .<=========>| | | 1..n | .
. +----+ +----+ . | GW | +-------+ .
. . +----+ .
. . +----+ +-------+ +-------+ .
. .<=========>| HA | | CN | | MNs | .
................... | | | 1..n | | home | .
+----+ +-------+ +-------+ .
. .
................................
Figure 2
TO:
2.2 VPN Gateway and MIPv4 HA(s) on the VPN domain border
A MIPv4 HA is deployed on the VPN domain border (e.g. in the DMZ)
together with the VPN gateway, and it is directly reachable by MNs
inside or outside the Intranet.
..Foreign Network.. .....VPN Domain..(Intranet).....
. . . .
. +----+ +----+ . +----+ +-------+ .
. |MNs | | FA | . | VPN| | Router| .
. |away| | | .<=========>| | | 1..n | .
. +----+ +----+ . | GW | +-------+ .
. . +----+ .
. . +----+ +-------+ +-------+ .
. .<=========>| HA | | CN | | MNs | .
................... | | | 1..n | | home | .
+----+ +-------+ +-------+ .
. .
................................
Figure 2
Comments?
Henrik
--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
_______________________________________________
Mip4 mailing list
Mip4@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.