Subject: [mobile-ip] IPv6 over Mobile IPv4

From: Bhatla Mukesh-MBHATLA1 <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 16:54:24 -0600

Hello All,

Till the time Mobile IPv6 issues are sorted out, this draft seems to be a
feasible solution. What's happening with this draft ?

I had a issue regarding the draft. As mentioned in the draft, why do we need
a dual stack both on the MN and the FA. If MN has the dual stack why can't
HA just tunnel the IPv6 packets in IPv4 tunnels to the MN (double IPv4
tunneling from HA to FA). FA just opens outer encapsulation and forwards the
packet based on the HA's IPv4 address and MN's IPv4 address. Anyway as
mentioned in the draft a private IPv4 address is assigned to the MN. That
way even FA is not changed..

Thanks,
Mukesh.

---

From: Tom Hiller <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:35:19 -0600

Mukesh,

The draft's status is as follows: Our latest revision of the draft (-02) does
what you suggest below, thereby eliminating FA changes and the need for the FA
to be dual stack. We mailed (-02) to internet-drafts earlier today, so it should
be announced in a few days. We can email it directly upon request in the
meantime.

We agree -  this is a good interim solution while IPv6 issues are resolved. 

thanks,
Tom