Re: [MEXT] DSMIPv6 deregistration

[Sri Gundavelli <sgundave at cisco.com>]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Hesham Soliman wrote:

> > > If you have two separate bindings, you need to link them in your
> > > implementation. If the primary binding cache entry (I consider the one
> > > for the IPv6 home address as the primary one) is removed, the IPv4 home
> > > address binding cache entry should also be removed.
> >
> > If the draft has recommendation for seperate binding entries,

> => The draft has no such recommendation. There is only one logical
> binding and that is tied to the IPv6 address.

Ok. Fine. These two places on BCE and BUL entries, it suggested
multiple entries. May be you may want to be specific, since this
is one mobility session, its still one logical entry. However, I'd
prefer to keep all the state associated to a mobility session in
one BCE entry, just as how NEMO does.  This special BCE linking as
Vijay suggested is not implied, that needlessly changes the BCE
data structure implementation on existing HA's.


Sec 5.5, On BCE entries

     If the binding update is accepted for both IPv4 and IPv6 home
      addresses, the home agent creates separate binding cache entries,
      one for each home address.  The care-of address is the one
      included in the binding update.  If the care-of address is an IPv4
      address, the home agent MUST setup a tunnel to the IPv4 care-of
      address of the mobile node.


5.4: On BUL entries:
      If the mobility header includes an IPv4 address acknowledgement
      option indicating success, the mobile node should create two
      entries in its binding update list, one for the IPv6 home address
      and another for the IPv4 home address.


Thanks
Sri
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext