Subject: [netlmm] Comments on draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions-01

From: "Mohana Jeyatharan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 09:12:19 +0800

Hi all,

Just a quick clarification on this PMIP.CMIP interaction issue draft.
The problems for scenario C was derived by assuming that CMIP cache and
PMIP cache are independent and can be simultanously maintained at the
collocated LMA/HA. 

My question is: If that is so, then how will the problem stated as
<MIPv6 de-registration Binding update deletes PMIPv6 binding cache
entry> occur in the first place. If the caches are separate, CMIP de-reg
should not touch/delete the PMIP binding and the problem stated above
will not occur. This is my understanding. 

Mohana

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

---

From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 23:26:47 -0700

Hello Mohana,

For Scenario C, there is only binding cache entry for a mobile node at a 
time. Both the MAG and the MN will be updating the same entry.

Vijay

---

From: "Giaretta, Gerardo" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 16:16:14 -0700

Hi Mohana,

The issues description is done based on what is specified in RFC 3775
and PMIPv6 draft. As a joint BC is not specified in these documents, the
issue is raised.

The solution requires that a common BC entry is present. Based on this,
the deregistration procedure can be performed as specified by the draft.

Thanks
Gerardo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mohana Jeyatharan [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 6:12 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [netlmm] Comments on
draft-giaretta-netlmm-mip-interactions-01