Subject: [Mipshop] NCoA option in HIs

From: Martin André <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:34:18 +0200

Hi there,

We're a little confused on how a multi interface NAR handling more than 
one IPv6 prefix must act upon receipt of a HI message.

Section 6.2.1 of the FMIPv6 draft, says that an HI MUST contain an LLA 
option and SHOULD contain a PCoA option but doesn't say anything on 
whether or not an NCoA option is mandatory. We have therefore the two 
following cases:

- NAR receives a HI message containing an NCoA option. The NCoA prefix 
indicates where the MN plans to go and the NAR has no doubt as to which 
of its interfaces is concerned, and it could thus perform all handover 
related actions (regenerate/verify the NCoA, start to defend it, and 
etc). This is all fine!

- NAR receives a HI message with no NCoA option inside.
How should it know which of its interfaces is the HI pertaining to?

In other words - wouldn't it be better to specify that the NCoA option 
is a MUST for HIs?

Thanks

Martin

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

---

From: Rajeev Koodli <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 11:57:49 -0700

Hello Martin,

thanks for pointing this out.

Section 4:

"The HI message contains the PCoA, Link-Layer Address, and the NCoA of 
the MN...."

The rest of the description also assumes NCoA being present.

I agree it would be better to also specify it in 6.2.1. I will make a 
note for the issue
tracker.

Regards,

-Rajeev

Martin Andri wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> We're a little confused on how a multi interface NAR handling more 
> than one IPv6 prefix must act upon receipt of a HI message.
>
> indicates where the MN plans to go and the NAR has no doubt as to 
> which of its interfaces is concerned, and it could thus perform all 
> handover related actions (regenerate/verify the NCoA, start to defend 
> it, and etc). This is all fine!
>