Subject: [MOBILE-IP] cdma2000 and IPv6

From: Andrew McCarthy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:15:36 -0000

Hi all,

This is my second email, so now there's no need to be so nice.

A small question on cdma 2000.

Can I first assume that the currently defined architecture for cdma2000
accommodates MIPv4, as we have a FA in the PDSN etc etc.

If I am correct, has there been much discussion regarding the solutions
needed when cdma 2000 upgrades to an Ipv6 architecture. Does anybody have
any idea what might happen. For example, will the PDSN act as a pseudo FA
(even though FA is not required in MIPv6) and hence even though IP addresses
are allocated per mobile node, the PDSN/FA manages the address allocation
and neighbour discovery mechanisms etc etc.?

Thanks

Andy

---

From: Thomas Eklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:06:23 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew McCarthy [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 9:16 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [MOBILE-IP] cdma2000 and IPv6
>
>
> Hi all,
>
Yes you are right....
And I would say that the current status is that the TIA group have focused
on mipv4 based solutions and try to develop new protocols where needed.
There goal is to have a solution for mipv6 based solutions as well, but no
one has worked with that yet, which is a pity because you get rid of so many
problems in default if you go for mipv6 based solutions...

> and neighbour discovery mechanisms etc etc.?

You can do it in several ways...
You can put a IPv6 router in PDSN and let is distribute router
advertisements in the Control Channels (like F-CCCH) so the mobile node can
then autoconfigure when it hear those messages.
This might not be so good for the air capacity so you migt want to preserve
the spectrum and have the existing channel infrastructure and when the
mobile node enters a new location area with a new PDSN, you let the mobile
send a solicitations message on the Control Channel to the PDSN and that
responds by sending back a RA to you on the control channel....
... There are many ways to solve this...
And basically I dont see any need for a FA...

/Thomas

---

From: "Munson, Mark A." <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:22:13 -0500

Why is there no need to be nice now?

Regarding cdma2000 -
Although IPv6 is on the long term work plan, no contributions have yet to
come in addressing the topic.  I read this as an indication that there is
not a  market demand (from the wireless carriers) for this capability.
Things have been known to change rapidly in the wireless standards arena,
but this is the reality for now.

Mark

> ----------
> From:         Andrew McCarthy[SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Reply To:     Andrew McCarthy
> Sent:         Wednesday, December 15, 1999 3:15 AM