Re: [MEXT] GRE support in DSMIPv6 - AD review

[Hesham Soliman <hesham at elevatemobile.com>]

> 
> Hesham Soliman wrote:
> 
>>>> At that time, there were folks arguing for using GRE
>>>> encapsulation with MIPv6 also.
>>> [behcet] I couldn't understand why MN would need to support
>>> GRE. Can someone explain the use case?
>> 
>> => It was done for NETLMM. Technically and practically speaking it
>> will never be used by the MN. And there is no reason for doing so.
>> Whenever GRE is used it's used within the network not from the host.
> 
> If that's the case, why not specify it for PMIPv6 only?

=> You're asking the wrong person :) I never wanted this. I fully support
moving this out of the draft.

Hesham

> 
> (That would potentially simplify the specs -- you don't e.g. need to
> think how "client MIPv6" IPsec (a messy area already) would work with
> GRE. PMIPv6+IPsec is much simpler case, and might not need any new
> text for GRE.)
> 
> Best regards,
> Pasi


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