Subject: [mobile-ip] MobileIPv6 and IKE

From: Alain RITOUX <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 10:57:48 +0100

Hi everybody.

I'm interested in the combinasion of mobileipv6 and its mandatory IPsec,
and I was wondering about the IKE usage.
Between ther MN and its HA, the BU need to be authenticated, hence an SA
must exist, but the HA can't speak with the MN, until the Co@ is known,
hence the BU accepted. So how can IKE work ?
- Is there a solution for this chicken-an-egg pb ?
- If yes, is it standard ?
Moreover, while reading a few drafts/RFC (mobility support in IPv6,
destination option header clarification, IIPv6 ...) I'm getting a little
bit cionfused about the IPv6 header extension order, or about where
MUST/SHOULD/LMAY? be Dest options wrt various Destination Option
Headers. Is there something  stable ? mandatory ?
btw I'm interested in any good material/references about those subjects.

If you feel, this subject should rather  be discussed on other lists
(IPsec ? IPng ? ....), just let me know.

Best regards.
Alain.

---

From: Mohan Parthasarathy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 16:03:38 -0800 (PST)

> hence the BU accepted. So how can IKE work ?

Read section 10.2 of the draft. You are supposed to use the CoA as the
source address without the home address option.

> btw I'm interested in any good material/references about those subjects.
Latest draft talks clearly about this i think. Home address option comes
before the IPsec header and Binding update comes after the IPsec header.
Home address option comes after the destination option that goes with
the routing header. This is a new position that is not discussed in
RFC 2460.  This was extensively discussed sometime ago. So,
please check the archives.

-mohan