RE: [Mip4] [Issue 17] Enhanced Registration Request processing at the Home Agent.

["Jayshree Bharatia" <jayshree at nortelnetworks.com>]

Hello Charlie,

The current proposal has two changes for section 3.8.3.2 of RFC3344:

Change 1: "If the Home Agent cannot support the specified nonzero unicast
address in the Home Address field of the Registration Request, then the Home
Agent MUST reject the registration with an error code of 129. "

If the MN registers a static Home Address (or registers with a previously
assigned dynamic Home Address) on a Home Agent that can not support the
presented Home Address, then the Home Agent fails the registration and
return code 129 "admin prohibited" (or something equivalent). 

Change 2: "if the destination IP address of the Registration Request is the
unicast IP address of this Home Agent, the Home Agent MAY accept the
Registration Request. If the destination IP address of the Registration
Request is not the unicast IP address of this Home Agent, the home agent
MUST reject the Registration Request with a suitable code(e.g., Code 136) to
prevent the mobile node from possibly being simultaneously registered with
two or more Home Agents."

This text is applicable for the Dynamic Home Agent mechanism. If the HA
receives a Registration Request with a Home Agent field not its own, the HA
"MAY" accept the registration. Please note that the current text requires
the HA to reject the registration. 

I would think that both of these are reasonable suggestions.

Thanks,
Jayshree

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles E. Perkins [mailto:charliep@iprg.nokia.com] 
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 3:37 PM
> To: mip4@ietf.org
> Cc: Henrik Levkowetz; Pete McCann
> Subject: Re: [Mip4] [Issue 17] Enhanced Registration Request 
> processing at the Home Agent.
> 
> 
> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> I propose that issue 17 be closed and
> marked as rejected.
> 
> Regards,
> Charlie P.
> 
> 
> 
> "Charles E. Perkins" wrote:
> > 
> > Hello folks,
> > 
> > Please refer to previous discussion at the following URL:
> >         http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/mip4/issue17
> > and:
> >         http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/03nov/142.htm
> > as necessary.
> > 
> > This issue has to deal with what the home agent might
> > do if it gets a Registration Request to an unknown
> > unicast address.  Nobody presented sufficient reasons
> > for the home agent to take any useful action other than 
> rejecting the 
> > Request.  I don't think that any changes to the 
> specification are yet 
> > warranted by discussion up until now.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Charlie P.
> > 
> > --
> > Mip4 mailing list
> > Mip4@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
> 
> -- 
> Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org
>     Web interface: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
>      Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
> Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/
> 

-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/