Subject: RE: [Mip6] draft-dupont-mip6-dhaadharmful-00.txt

From: "Narayanan Vidya-CVN065" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:20:54 -0400

>    
> => the two questions are:
>  - should we keep a DHAAD mechanism or HA assignment is the 
> right thing
>    to do?
>  - is the DNS-based DHAAD mechanism better enough to replace 
> the ICMP-base
>    one?
> 

These are good questions. I believe that a DNS-based mechanism is
largely better than an ICMP-based mechansim. For those who wish to
secure the operation, at least an option is available. Whether DNSSEC
will be widely deployed is a separate question, but at least, it is an
option. Also, it moves away from having to configure the home network
prefix and removes the limitation of dynamic HA assignment within the
same subnet, both of which are big pluses in my mind. 

Regards,
Vidya

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:34:20 +0200

Narayanan Vidya-CVN065 wrote:
>> 
>> => the two questions are: - should we keep a DHAAD mechanism or HA
>>  assignment is the right thing to do? - is the DNS-based DHAAD 
>> mechanism better enough to replace the ICMP-base one?
>> 
> 
>  will be widely deployed is a separate question, but at least, it is
>  an option.

It follows, yes.

Let's compare to RO.  RO is a solution when MN and CN can't use
IPsec/IKE because PKI may not be deployed everywhere.

Same with non-anycast DHAAD, probably.  DNS-based HAD is a solution when
DNSSEC is deployed everywhere, otherwise use non-anycast DHAAD, no?

> Also, it moves away from having to configure the home network prefix

Yes, but it enforces the configuration of (textual variations of)
"home.com".  A real advantage for DNS-based easying the bootstrapping
would have been if there was nothing to pre-configure.

> and removes the limitation of dynamic HA assignment within the same 
> subnet, both of which are big pluses in my mind.

One may see multiple-subnet HAs for a single MN as a big plus, but it is
not at all clear whether a MN could continue using the same HoA after
changing its HA from one subnet to another.  And, if when the MN
switches its HA on another link is changing its HoA as well - it is
equivalent to running DHAAD with a different subnet prefix.

Alex