Subject: [16NG] comments on draft-jeon-ipv6-over-ieee802.16-ethcs-00.txt

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:46:48 +0100

Hello to authors of draft-jeon-ipv6-over-ieee802.16-ethcs-00.txt.  I
have read the draft and I have some comments.

In general, I think only section 6 "Transmission of IPv6 over Ethernet
CS" is relevant to IETF.  This is an oppinion.  I don't see why section
5 "IEEE 802.16 Network Model on IPv6 over Ethernet CS" should be put
here.  It could easily be separated and referenced to.  I could remark
separately on section 5, if needed.

> 6.  Transmission on IPv6 over Ethernet CS

This is what is needed.  It could list MTU size, ethertype for MAC
header, packet encapsulation, link-local addressing and a big reference
to RFC 2464 IPv6 over Ethernet.

> 6.1.  On-Link Issue
> 
> The assignment of a common prefix to all SSs under a specific AR 
> means locating them "on-link" in terms of IP packet transfer. 
> According to [I-D.ietf-ipv6-2461bis], IP node performs a longest 
> prefix match against the prefix list in order to decide whether the 
> destination of the IP packet is on-link or not.  Therefore, SSs 
> sharing a prefix can be said to on-link IP nodes.

Is this a goal?  A requirement?  An observed event in a 802.16
deployment?  It were best if it were observed, but goal is fine too.

> Section 5 says that direct communication among SSs is depending on 
> the type of IEEE 802.16 network model scenario.  Above the second 
> scenario
[above?  2nd scenario?]
> does not support direct communication between SSs and it results in 
> the problem of locating SSs on-link in terms of IP packet transfer.

I think I sense an issue here.  I think the problem is that SS connects
with a p2p link to BS and thus it doesn't see other SSs under same BS.
Well, this is not really a problem.  In 802.11 the link-layer
connections are also p2p to the AP and ND still works fine over it.  At
link-layer, two hosts under same AP don't hear each other.  The 802.16
ETH CS could and should do the same, such that the IPv6 ND and its
multicast features work ok.

> By the way, VLAN in the first scenario allows each SSs to communicate
>  each other directly.  Therefore, all IPv6 NDP messages can be 
> exchanged between SSs and there is no On-Link issue.

Not sure what VLAN is?  In this context?  The document also talks about
VLAN CS?

Alex

_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng