Subject: Re: [netlmm] PMIPv6: Mobile Prefix Discovery

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 07:51:41 -0700 (PDT)

A quick fix to this:
In case of renumbering or prefix expiry, LMA sends PBA with (the new) HNP and lifetime to MAG. MAG sends a unicast RA if stateless address config is used or DHCP Reconfigure if stateful address config is used.

No new message is needed unlike MIP6 case of ICMP Mobile Prefix Advertisement message.

Regards,

Behcet
----- Original Message ----
From: Kandra Mohan-a22098 <[email-masked]>
To: Sri Gundavelli <[email-masked]>; Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 4:12:21 AM
Subject: [netlmm] PMIPv6: Mobile Prefix Discovery 

Hi,

>From section 5.7 of draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6-00.txt:

How can a MAG will come to know that there is a change in the MN prefix
and thus it can advertise the ICMP Mobile Prefix Advertisement message
to that MN?

Is it that an interface with relevant messages is required between
policy store and the MAG?

Thanks,
Mohan

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

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

---

From: "Sri Gundavelli" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 18:24:13 -0700

Hi Behcet,

  _____  

From: Behcet Sarikaya [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 7:52 AM
To: Sri Gundavelli
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [netlmm] PMIPv6: Mobile Prefix Discovery

 >  A quick fix to this:
 >  In case of renumbering or prefix expiry, LMA sends PBA with (the new)
HNP and  
>  lifetime to MAG. MAG sends a unicast RA if stateless address config is
used or  
>  DHCP Reconfigure if stateful address  >  config is used.

LMA cannot initiate a PBA with out having recieved any PBU.  We dont see
much need
for supporting prefix renumbering and so droppped it.
 
Sri

---

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 09:24:32 +0300

> A quick fix to this: In case of renumbering or prefix expiry, LMA
> sends PBA with (the new) HNP and lifetime to MAG. MAG sends a unicast
> RA if stateless address config is used or DHCP Reconfigure if
> stateful address config is used.
> 

Behcet,

on the other hand, you also don't introduce a new message if you let the
LMA send an ICMP Mobile Prefix Advertisement message for prefix updates,
given that this message exists already.  This would be in-line with the
renumbering procedure in RFC 3775.

Why do you think RFC 3775 renumbering is not an option for PMIPv6?

I do agree, however, that the base specification should provide some
guidance on how a MAG would handle a renumbering event -- namely, by
withdrawing the old prefix via a zero lifetime for a while when
introducing the new prefix.  Note that this affects the MAG-MN
interface, not the LMA-MAG interface.

- Christian

PS:  FWIW, I put this issue in the tracker until we have settled it.

---

From: "Sri Gundavelli" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 23:36:31 -0700

Hi Christian:

Please see inline ..

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Vogt [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:25 PM
> To: Behcet Sarikaya
> Cc: Sri Gundavelli; [email-masked]

The MAG can certainly advertise new prefixes and withdraw old prefixes,
that guidance we can certainly provide. But, how the renumbering event
is notified to the MAG, is bit involved. To support unsolicited Mobile
Prefix Advertisement, ICMP Messages, between the LMA and the MAG, we
need to remove the Type-II routing header, as the message is directed
to the MAG and also we need to define some ICMP options for carrying
the NAI of the mobile node. So, IMO, this special renumbering event
can always be handled at the boundaries of re-registrations, but not
at adhoc fashion as its very involved. LMA can always return a new
prefix in the reregistration request, or the provisioning systems can
trigger service revocation and force reregistrations. So, the issue can
be solved in one or more ways. We can provide general guidance on how
the MAG manages the prefix change notification, but ICMP messaging may
be bit too much to add, at this stage. Also, with the new definition
of a PMIP domain, the scope of the domain can be large, as long as there
is security relation between the LMA and the MAG, its likely the ICMP
messages may be blocked at key points in the network.

If you and Behcet agree to this, we can document the consensus.

Regards
Sri