Subject: RE: [nemo] About Test Specification in IPv6 Ready Logo

From: "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:13:44 +0100

Hi:

Your example is an extended Home Network case, and you have used a Home
Address from the prefix on the Home Link. In that case, the HA expects
that the MR is at Home when there is not binding, and it will deliver
over the Home Link the packets routed via MR's HoA A:B:C:0::i.

As Keiichi says there are 2 case.

Implicit:

HA knows A:B:C:i::/64 via A:B:C:0::i; if this is a static information
(static or automatic route) then the HA keeps that route regardless of
whether the MR is bound. The HA can share that information with other
GWs on the Home Link using an IGP over the Home Link, but to keep it
simple just assume that the HA is also the default GW in the Home Link. 

So if MR1 is at Home, the HA can still reach any LFN behind it because
it has a static information for the route A:B:C:i::/64 via A:B:C:0::i
and it expects A:B:C:0::i over the Home Link. If another MR at home
needs to reach the LFN, packets will first reach the HA (default GW),
and the HA will issue an ICMP redirect. MRs could also expose their
prefix on the Home Link using RFC 4191 to save that flow.

So MRs do not need to participate to the IGP on the Home Link, and that
can be a benefit in a very large or very dynamic Home configuration

Explicit:

The route in the HA is associated to the binding. When the MR comes back
Home, the route is lost and the MR needs to participate to whatever IGP
is run at Home. The choice of the IGP is a configuration issue, it can
be any of the usual suspects (OSPF, RIP, EIGRP, ISIS, you name it). It
could even be a MANET :) The choice of the IGP and how you deploy it
will impact the capability for your Home Network to handle/survive a
more or less high rate of changes (routers in/out) 

What NEMO adds: NEMO requires that the MR presents itself as a router
and participates to the IGP only if it is at Home. So either you have a
dedicated interface for going Home or you have some dynamics in the
behavior of the roaming interface(s) that can reach Home to switch
between at-Home and Roaming profiles. 

It can be expected that routing within a nested NEMO (MANEMO) will
somewhat alleviate that restriction.

Pascal

>-----Original Message-----
>From: K.Kawaguchi [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 2:49 AM
>To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [nemo] About Test Specification in IPv6 Ready Logo
>
>Hi,
>
>"Keiichi SHIMA <[email-masked]>" wrote:
>> On 2006/11/25, at 13:29, Keiichi SHIMA wrote:
>>
>> >>> So, even in
>> >>> the case 2, we can put a routing entry for the mobile network
prefix
>> >>> by not using any routing protocol.
>> >>
>> >> Please teach the method of not using routing protocol.
>> >> Is there draft or RFC ?
>> >
>> > Since a mobile node knows its mobile network prefix, it can install
>> > a routing entry for it after it receives a binding ack message.
>> > The home agent of the mobile node will know the mobile network
>> > prefix stored in a binding update message from the mobile node, it
>> > can also install a routing entry when it receives the binding
>> > update message.
>>
>> Some more minor additional notes...
>>
>> The above example is for the explicit mode.  And if we use implicit
>> mode, then these two entities already know what to do when
>> registration completes.  So either using a dynamic routing or not is
>> just a configuration issue for route management and it has nothing to
>> do with the network model.
>>
>> # if I'm not missing something.
>
>I still have my uncertain point.
>Please look at the following figures.
>
>                   |
>                   HA1
>                   |
>  -----+-----+-----+-----+----- Home Link: A:B:C:0::/64
>       |     |           |
>       |     |           | MR1-egress
>       H     R(MR)       MR1
>             |           | MR1-ingress (Home Address)
>                         |
>                        -+----- Mobile Network: A:B:C:i::/64
>
>
>I agree as you say, HA and MR can install own routing table entry by
>binding message. However, how do you tell it to other nodes on home
>network?
>How do you do when MR1 moves from the home link and the binding message
>is completed? Also, how do you do when MR1 returns to the home link?
>
>
>Best regards
>---
>Kiyoaki KAWAGUCHI

---

From: "K.Kawaguchi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:05:11 +0900

Hi,

> over the Home Link the packets routed via MR's HoA A:B:C:0::i.

My example is an extended Home Network case. But, Home Address from
Mobile Network Prefix (5.3 Home Address from MNP in draft-ietf-nemo-home
-network-models-06).

> can be a benefit in a very large or very dynamic Home configuration

I understand this case (thanks you).

On the other hand, in the case Home Address from MNP.
Does MR need to join in IGP after configuring the address at the home?

> between at-Home and Roaming profiles. 

Ok, I understand.
This is the same also in the case from MNP, isn't it?

Best regards
---
Kiyoaki KAWAGUCHI