Subject: RE: [nemo] RE: about the Home Network Models WG item

From: "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 17:23:08 +0100

| -----Original Message-----
| From: Alexandru Petrescu [mailto:[email-masked]]
| Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 5:11 PM
| To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
| Cc: nemo
| Subject: Re: [nemo] RE: about the Home Network Models WG item
| 
| Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
| 
| > | A-ha!  So without the HA proxying all addresses in all MNPs in its
| > BC | the "HoA from MNP" can not work.
| >
| > Think again:
| >
| > It's not the HoA from MNP that does not work without the proxying.
| 
| Right, it's not the HoA from the MNP that does not work without the
| proxying, it is the entire "HoA from the MNP" scenario that does not
work.
| 
| > It is the support of coming Home in the Aggregated Home Network
| > Model.
| 
| Not only the coming home in the Aggregated Home Network Model.  Many
| other things don't work when using HoA from MNP.  So I was looking to
| find out what are the advantages of using the HoA from MNP.
| 
Alex:

I have a feeling that you do not like taking the HoA from MNP; but
please do not confuse people on this list with wrong assertions.

The problem we are discussing here is in the case of aggregated, a node
on the home link that pings an address on a NEMO that is not at Home. So
the HA has to proxy as mentioned in the draft for the ping to work. 

This is not due to whether the MR HoA is taken from the MNP or the rest
of aggregation.  The problem comes from the fact that everyone on the
link thinks that the aggregation is on the link. That's the definition
of the model.

Pascal

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 17:59:41 +0100

> please do not confuse people on this list with wrong assertions.

Sorry I don't mean to confuse anyone.  I think I'll refrain posting on 
this subject because it seems I'm confusing people.

> the HA has to proxy as mentioned in the draft for the ping to work. 

Right, I was not discussing the case of aggregated.  I was discussing 
the simple basic mode, the one before "extended", the one that does not 
use the HoA from MNP.

> link thinks that the aggregation is on the link.

This is another topic.  I wanted to discuss about it later.  For the 
moment my only proposal is to have a simple basic mode that does not use 
the HoA from MNP.

For the topic where everyone on the link thinks that the entire 
aggregation is on the link: is the MR still a router, or just a sort of 
bridge?

Alex