Subject: [mobile-ip] a summary of problems for the requirements to the IPv6 base spec

From: Keiichi SHIMA / 島慶一 <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:34:02 +0900 (JST)

I know many of you are tired to read my mail.  But, before IPv6 WG
session, please give me a chance to explain why I think it hard.

There are two parts in the requirements.  One is already accepted by
the IPv6 WG.  The other is not preseneted to them yet.

If we want to put HAO and BE processing into the IPv6 base spac, we
must update the following things.

(1) [already accepted by the IPv6 WG]
    HAO format definition.

(2) [already accepted by the IPv6 WG]
    Modification of the recommended order of the extension headers
    defined in the section 4.1 of RFC2460, because HAO is not
    placed in the DO1 nor DO2.

(3) [not presented yet]
    IPsec consideration.  HAO must not be processed if the packet
    which contains HAO is not protected by the IPsec.

(4-a) [not presented yet]
    Introducing a new extension header, the mobility header.
    To be able to send a binding error message from IPv6 node, we
    must define a mobility header in the IPv6 base spec.

(4-b) [not presented yet]
    A new recomended extension header order which describes that
    the position of the mobility header.

The last 3 items are not presented to IPv6 WG.  I'm not sure it is OK
for them without any discussion.  If the IPv6 WG does not accept them,
the mobile ipv6 draft will not be accepted to become a rfc.

I really want to make mip6 become standard, not complaining without
any reason.

So, please consider to talk with IPv6 people about the new
requirements for them.

Best Regards,

---
Keiichi SHIMA
IIJ Research Laboratory <[email-masked]>
KAME Project <[email-masked]>