Subject: Was Node Mobility a Requirement for IPng?

From: "Glenn Morrow" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 14:26:53 -0600

Hello,
 
Does anyone know if node mobility was a requirement for IPng during the
debates among the proposals? 
 
If so was SIPP supposed to rely on MIPv6 to fullfill this requirement or are
these really disjunct with MIPv6 being an add on. 
 
I'm just trying to understand the thinking of the past and how each might be
reason to affect the other. 
 
Thanks,
 
Glenn

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 17:57:04 +0100

In your previous mail you wrote:

=> I believe it was but which kind of mobility? At least the current
Mobile IPv4 situation, i.e. bidirectional tunnel between the mobile node
and its home agent.

=> I don't believe for SIPP but PIP has some support for mobility
(look at the "Pip Near-term Arch" document section 14 "Host Mobility",
some of us preciously kept some copies of it).

Regards

[email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------