Subject: [Mip6] Bootstrapping DT solution draft

From: Gerardo Giaretta <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:54:56 +0200

Dear WG,

the bootstrapping DT has submitted a solution draft. The document
defines how a Mobile Node can bootstrap MIPv6 operations from
non-topological information and pre-configured security credentials. The
solution solves the boostrapping problem when the Mobile Node's mobility
service is authorized by a different service provider than basic network
access (i.e. split scenario).

The draft can be found at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-split-
00.txt.

The DT is currently working on optimized solutions for integrated
scenario (i.e. mobility service and basic network access are authorized
by the same entity).

Please read the document and provide comments.

Thanks and regards,

--Gerardo (DT editor)

Gruppo Telecom Italia - Direzione e coordinamento di Telecom Italia S.p.A.

====================================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please send an e_mail to
[email-masked]. Thank you
====================================================================

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

---

From: Mayumi Yanagiya <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:36:49 +0900

Hi Gerardo and solution DT members,

First, I'd like to express my appreciation for your work.

I have a comment about dynamic DNS update in this draft.

In section6, it is described that dynamic DNS update function is 
important to keep IP reachability when MN is assigned HoA dynamically. 
I agree this. But, is it essential function for MIPv6 bootstrapping?
I think we can use FQDN assigned by a domain name provider, which is 
different from MSP/MSA, for IP reachability even if we get HoA from MSP.

I understood that DT has selected the split scenario, which was simpler 
scenario, in order to make the first solution generic. In the split 
scenario, we don’t assume that there is relationship between MSP and 
access service provider. Should we assume that there is relationship 
between MSP and DNS provider?

Best Regards,
--Mayumi

-- 

*++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NTT Network Service Systems Laboratories
Mayumi Yanagiya
tel: +81 422 59 6783   fax: +81 422 59 5631
E-mail: [email-masked]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++*

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:59:08 -0700

Mayumi,

What is the "domain provider"? A separate administrative entity from the MSP
or MSA?

If so, then what network entity will be updating the DNS server with the HoA
(which the MN will get from the MSP)?

            jak

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mayumi Yanagiya" <[email-masked]>
To: "Gerardo Giaretta" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 8:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Mip6] Bootstrapping DT solution draft

Best Regards,
--Mayumi

--