RE: [Mip4] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt

["Tsirtsis, George" <tsirtsis at qualcomm.com>]

You are doing DS-MIPv6 in MIP6 WG. It stands to reason that DS-MIPv4
should be done in MIP4 WG.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Basavaraj Patil [mailto:basavaraj.patil at nokia.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 8:53 AM
> To: Tsirtsis, George; mip4 at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Mip4] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> 
> 
> Okay...
> From a logistical perspective, if you believe this is a transition
> mechanism
> for IPv6 and given that Ngtrans no longer exists maybe it should be
> discussed or work done between the MIP4 and v6ops WGs? Just a
suggestion.
> The chairs can decide what makes the best sense.
> 
> -Raj
> 
> 
> On 4/21/06 6:35 AM, "ext Tsirtsis, George" <tsirtsis at qualcomm.com>
wrote:
> 
> > Raj,
> >
> > I am not claiming that DS-MIPv4 is a magic bullet for anything. I am
> > only suggesting that it may be the most sensible way to go for a
network
> > that is MIPv4 based today and wants to start moving to IPv6.
> >
> > Yes, there are many ngtrans tools defined (some think too many) but
> > DS-MIP is the obvious one that was missed. It was missed because at
the
> > time ngtrans was defining tools, Mobile iP was not nearly as much
> > deployed as it is today and because the IETF had and still has big
> > problems with understanding mobility.
> >
> > But think about it. Virtually every other ngtrans tool defines a
> > mechanism that automatically or semi-automatically configures
tunnels.
> > Well, Mobile IP is nothing but a tunnel manager with a lot of bells
and
> > whistles (for access control, authentication, configuration, network
> > mobility etc) and with mobility support for free. If a have a
network
> > that already uses Mobile IP, and all the back-end systems to make it
> > work, why would I want to use some other tunnel management protocol
on
> > top of it with all its additional complexity and overhead? Its just
> > makes no sense!
> >
> > George
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Basavaraj Patil [mailto:basavaraj.patil at nokia.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 11:52 PM
> >> To: Tsirtsis, George; mip4 at ietf.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Mip4] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi George,
> >>
> >> Inline:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/20/06 5:28 PM, "ext Tsirtsis, George" <tsirtsis at qualcomm.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> Raj,
> >>>
> >>> The purpose of DS-MIPv4 is slightly different than what you
present
> >>> below. Keep in mind that Mobile IPv4 (unlike Mobile IPv6) is
> > deployed
> >>> today in multiple networks, corporate and operator owned.
> >>
> >> No argument about the fact that MIP4 has some deployment today and
> > MIP6
> >> has
> >> none. MIP6 is in a catch22 situation. You need IPv6 deployments to
> > enable
> >> MIP6.... So let me not speculate when, how, where this will/may
> > happen.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> What we are trying to do is to allow these operators to provide
IPv6
> > to
> >>> their customers with an incremental approach that fits their
> > deployment
> >>> scenario (mobility) and without having to replace their entire
> >>> infrastructure.
> >>
> >> So the assumption here is that there are operators that want to
> > provide
> >> IPv6
> >> service and this can be enabled by having IPv6 carried over
mobility
> >> enabled
> >> tunnels that are setup by MIP4. Well, if the operator wants to
provide
> >> IPv6
> >> service there will be hosts that are DS...So now the question is
how
> > to
> >> access the IPv6 island given the fact that it is only v4 that is
> >> ubiquitous,
> >> and provide mobility at the same time.
> >> Yes, you could do this using MIP4 as you explain in your
well-written
> > I-D.
> >> Or you could setup IPsec tunnels to a VPN GW that supports Mobike
and
> > run
> >> IPv6 over it
> >> Or you run Mobile IPv6 over v4 access as is being specified by the
> > design
> >> team (MIP6/NEMO).
> >> So in the above scenarios the last two require some additional or
new
> >> infra
> >> to be added. But with MIP4 as well it does not come for free. You
need
> > to
> >> upgrade the MIP4 HA as well as upgrade the MIP4 clients. So there
is a
> >> cost
> >> involved irrespective of which path you take.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Think of it this way:
> >>>
> >>> - DS-MIPv4 extensions will ease transition to IPv6 for networks
that
> > are
> >>> currently Mobile IPv4 based.
> >>
> >> Hmmm... I wish this was the magic bullet.  But I am not sure. If
> > operators
> >> want to deploy IPv6, I think existing transition mechanisms are
more
> > than
> >> sufficient to enable it. I don't know if DS-MIP4 is the enabler
that
> > will
> >> change the status quo.
> >> DS-MIP4 is as I said, yet another transition mechanism that
addresses
> > a
> >> small percentage of IPv4 hosts which are MIP4 enabled but I am not
so
> >> convinced that it is "THE" feature that is currently missing which
is
> >> prohibiting deployment of IPv6.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> - DS-MIPv6 will allow green field IPv6 deployments to happen while
> >>> providing access to the IPv4 Internet.
> >>
> >> True.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> George
> >>
> >> -Raj
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Basavaraj Patil [mailto:basavaraj.patil at nokia.com]
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 6:18 PM
> >>>> To: Tsirtsis, George; mip4 at ietf.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Mip4] FW: I-D
ACTION:draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> George,
> >>>>
> >>>> So we have many transition mechanisms for supporting IPv6 when a
> > host
> >>>> is attached to an IPv4 access today. Obviously none of them are
> > able
> >>>> to deal with mobility (i.e the host moving to different v4
> >>>> subnets). Your I-D basically is provding yet another transition
> >>>> mechanism for IPv6 with the added benefit of mobility. We are
> > talking
> >>>> about dual-stack mobile hosts here, right... And you would agree
> > that
> >>>> most IPv4 hosts do not have Mobile IPv4 client capability today.
> > Given
> >>>> that the host is a dual-stack node, it should support MIP6 as
part
> > of
> >>>> its IPv6 stack. Hence it would be better to handle mobility using
> > MIP6
> >>>> and also provide IPv4 connectivity using such an approach.
> >>>> In your I-D you state:
> >>>>
> >>>> "
> >>>>    On the other hand, and more importantly, it allows dual stack
> >>> mobile
> >>>>    nodes and networks to utilize a single protocol for the
movement
> > of
> >>>>    both IPv4 and IPv6 stacks in the network topology.
> >>>> "
> >>>> The design team in MIP6/NEMO WG is essentially working on
> > addressing
> >>>> the same issue for DS nodes. Why not use IPv6 mobility as the
> > baseline
> >>>> mobility protocol?
> >>>>
> >>>> The other point that I had was if connectivity to IPv6 islands is
> > the
> >>>> need of the hour with mobility, could you not address this by
using
> > a
> >>>> Mobike solution that also provides transition GW capability on
the
> > GW
> >>>> side?
> >>>>
> >>>> -Raj
> >>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>> From: Henrik Levkowetz [mailto:henrik at levkowetz.com]
> >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 10:44 AM
> >>>>>>> To: Tsirtsis, George
> >>>>>>> Cc: Pete McCann; mip4 at ietf.org
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Mip4] FW: I-D
> >>> ACTION:draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi George,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> on 2006-04-17 16:34 Tsirtsis, George said the following:
> >>>>>>>> Pete/Henrik,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This draft was just updated and it is now available on the
I-D
> >>>>>>>> directory.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Good, good.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Based on the discussion during the WG meeting we are
requesting
> >>>>> for
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> proposal to be adopted as a working group draft.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Right.  Well, we didn't have time for any proper discussion
> > during
> >>>>>>> the meeting, and there were voices which called for that,
> >>>>> explicitly,
> >>>>>>> so let's start by hearing what people have to say about this
> >>>>> proposal.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Speak up, people!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Henrik
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Comments and suggestions are always welcome.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>> George
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>> From: Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
> > [mailto:Internet-Drafts at ietf.org]
> >>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 6:50 PM
> >>>>>>>> To: i-d-announce at ietf.org
> >>>>>>>> Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
> >>> Internet-Drafts
> >>>>>>>> directories.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Title  : Dual Stack Mobile IPv4
> >>>>>>>> Author(s) : G. Tsirtsis, et al.
> >>>>>>>> Filename : draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> >>>>>>>> Pages  : 17
> >>>>>>>> Date  : 2006-4-14
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This specification provides IPv6 extensions to the Mobile
IPv4
> >>>>>>>> [MIPv4] protocol. The extensions allow a dual stack node to
use
> >>>>> IPv4
> >>>>>>>> and IPv6 home addresses as well as move between IPv4 and dual
> >>>>> stack
> >>>>>>>> network infrastructures.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a
> > message
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> i-d-announce-request at ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in
the
> >>>>> body
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>> the message.
> >>>>>>>> You can also visit
> >>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce
> >>>>>>>> to change your subscription settings.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login
with
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> username
> >>>>>>>> "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After
> > logging
> >>>>> in,
> >>>>>>>> type "cd internet-drafts" and then
> >>>>>>>> "get draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt".
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
> >>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> >>>>>>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Send a message to:
> >>>>>>>> mailserv at ietf.org.
> >>>>>>>> In the body type:
> >>>>>>>> "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-tsirtsis-v4v6-mipv4-01.txt".
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
> >>>>>>>> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
> >>>>>>>> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
> >>>>>>>> command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack"
or
> >>>>>>>> a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail
> >>>>>>>> readers
> >>>>>>>> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
> >>>>>>>> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been
split
> >>>>>>>> up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation
> > on
> >>>>>>>> how to manipulate these messages.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail
> > reader
> >>>>>>>> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of
> > the
> >>>>>>>> Internet-Draft.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
> >>>>>>>     Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
> >>>>>>>      Charter page:
> >>>>> http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
> >>>>>>> Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "This email message and any attachments are confidential
> >>> information
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>> Starent Networks, Corp. The information transmitted may not be
> > used
> >>> to
> >>>>>> create or change any contractual obligations of Starent
Networks,
> >>>>> Corp.
> >>>>>> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
> >>> taking
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>> any action in reliance upon this e-mail and its attachments by
> >>> persons
> >>>>> or
> >>>>>> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
you
> >>> are
> >>>>> not
> >>>>>> the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately --
> > by
> >>>>>> replying to this message or by sending an email to
> >>>>>> postmaster at starentnetworks.com -- and destroy all copies of
this
> >>>>> message
> >>>>>> and any attachments without reading or disclosing their
contents.
> >>>>> Thank
> >>>>>> you."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
> >>>>>     Web interface: https://www1.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 at ietf.org
> >>>     Web interface: https://www1.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 at ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/