Subject: [mobile-ip] Mobile-IP and MPLS Integration

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 12:11:08 -0500

Hi,
      I have a question regarding LSP tunnel establishment between Ingress LER
of CN and FA-LER of MN in
section 3.4.2 .  RFC.
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-choi-mobileip-ldpext-01.txt
(MPLS-based Mobile IP Route Optimization Scenario.)  Also, LSP tunnel between
HA-LER and
FA-LER, is not possible if care of address is of type co-located care-of
address.  As both the binding and
registration messages doesn't contain address of FA .  One solution to the above
 problem
is to mention the FA address(LER) in registration message and binding update
when care of address is of
 type co-located.

 Thanks,
Satish Amara

---

From: Ash h <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:34:24 -0700 (PDT)

Why do you think that the co-located care-of-addr should be treated differently? If the COA is conveyed to the Ingress LER all that it needs to do is to establish a tunnel [LSP] to that address. The mobile node should be capable of understanding the Label Map Request. If not then I don't know how the FA's address will help, since the tunnel is expected to terminate at the MN but gets terminated at the FA and the FA doesn't know what it should do with the datagram after decapsulation. Correct me.

  [email-masked] wrote: 

Hi,

Thanks,
Satish Amara

---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Click and bid on cool stuff like Dave Matthews Band Tickets & more!