Click to edit Master title style Click to add subtitle © 2008 Wichorus Inc. All rights reserved. CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE rfc3775bis Issues November 17, 2008

Click to edit Master title style Closed issues: #3, #5, #6; #1, #4, #8, #12, #13, #14 Issues #3, #5, #6 closed before IETF 72 #1 Last Accepted SQN - fixed #4Removing Site-Local - fixed #8 Application using the care-of address - fixed #12 BErr sent by HA too, not only by CN - fixed #13 Home Link Detection - fixed #14 References to Bootstrapping - fixed

Click to edit Master title style Open issues: #2, #7, #9, #10, #11, #15, #16, #17 #2 Removing DHAAD mechanism #7 DSMIPv6 BU format and RFC 3775 #9 Simultaneous Mobility #10 The usage of "HA lifetime" #11 De-registration when returning home #15 BRR sent by HA too, not only by CN #16 HA behaviour upon MN returning Home #17 Multi-homed MN cause routing loop between home agents

Click to edit Master title style Issue #2: Removing DHAAD mechanism (defect) [Jean-Michel Combes ] draft-dupont-mext-dhaadharmful-00.txt “Security Considerations” borrowed some of that text Some options:  Leave in  Throw it away  New document  Note: all suggested revisions have been incorporated Separate discussion scheduled for later

Click to edit Master title style Issue #7: DSMIPv6 BU and RFC 3775 (enhancement) [Tero Kauppinen: Problem: IPv4 address in encapsulating header can never match the source address (IPv6 CoA) of BU Proposal 1: Require an IPv4 mapped IPv6 address in the BU header Proposal 2: view DSMIPv6 as a document updating the behavior specified in rfc3375bis, punt Proposal 3: require lifetime=0 for deregistration, regardless of whether HoA == CoA.

Click to edit Master title style Issue #9: Simultaneous Mobility (defect) [Ashutosh Dutta Problem: signaling for RO can fail if mobile node and correspondent node move simultaneously Proposal: fall back to reverse tunneling – but, when?  Right away?  After one try?  After MAX_RETRIES?  Retry in parallel with reverse tunneling? No recent progress or discussion on this issue…

Click to edit Master title style Ready to close Issue #10: The usage of "HA lifetime" (defect) [Ryuji Wakikawa ] Does MN expunge home agent address when its lifetime expires? Even for statically configured? Is there a default value for the HA address lifetime? A matter for local configuration? Proposal: HA addresses from "Home Agent Address Discovery Reply" message do NOT expire Proposal: do NOT expire HA address while roaming Proposal: Use Benjamin Lin’s text to close issue

Click to edit Master title style Ready to be closed: Issue #11 #11 De-registration when returning home When a mobile node returns home, and its home agent has a current binding for it, in order to send and receive packets on the home link the mobile node MUST send a Binding Update Otherwise, it MUST NOT attempt to make use of the home link Text is available on issues page:

Click to edit Master title style Issue #15: BRR sent by HA too (enhancement) [Ahmad Muhanna ] Should HA be allowed to send BRR? Proposal: it could increase reliability of MN registration Objection: This could be considered new functionality and thus not appropriate for rfc3775bis Objection: This could cause a lot more signaling over the air, unnecessary for properly designed MNs

Click to edit Master title style Issue #16: HA behaviour when MN returns Home (defect) [Pascal Thubert ] Problem: if mobile node reboots, it may not remember to reclaim control of its home address when it detects it is on the home network. Proposal: let MN use DAD or oDAD, and update existing local neighbor caches by setting ‘O’ bit. Concern: maintain backwards compatibility Reality check: do we have to protect against this sort of selective amnesia on the part of MN?

Click to edit Master title style Issue #17 Multi-homed mobile node can cause routing loop between home agents [Benjamin Lim ] A mobile node having security associations with two home agents can fool both of them and create a routing loop Uses home address for one home agent as care-of address for the other home agent, and vice versa This is difficult to correct using mechanisms natural to Mobile IP Proposal: use RFC 2473 Tunnel Limit option Proposal: draft-ng-intarea-tunnel-loop

Click to edit Master title style Minor note/suggestion about issue description Document owner (me) “owns” the result of resolving the issue (buck stops here) Issue owner “responsible” for checking to see if I have correctly summarized the issue and the discussion from the mailing list “defect” – something wrong with the document “enhancement” – something that should be done to improve the document Suggestions for best use of issue tracker welcome!