1. NEMO Basic Support Protocol IETF 60, San Diego
Vijay Devarapalli

2. NEMO Basic Support Status
Approved by the IESG
In the RFC Editor queue

3. Technical Issues Tunnel Interface Flapping
If tunnel goes up and down every time the MR moves, the amount of interface changes can overload the HA and result in high level of instability in the entire network
Resolved
A tunnel interface is consistently assigned to each Mobile Router as long as it has a valid binding cache at the Home Agent
Every time the Mobile Router moves and updates the binding cache entry, the bi-directional tunnel should not be torn down and setup again. The tunnel end points should be updated dynamically with the Mobile Router's current care-of address.
Hello Packet processing
Bi-directional tunnel treated as OSPF on-demand circuits (RFC 1793)

4. Technical Issues OSPF Areas considerations
The entire Home domain SHOULD NOT be configured as a single area if a Home Agent supports Mobile Routers. At least the Home Network should be configured as a separate area.
The bi-directional tunnel interfaces to the Mobile Routers should never be included in the same area as the backbone links.
Should the Home link be an OSPF area?
Should each bi-directional tunnel be a stub area?
Depends on the specific deployment
HMIPv6 flag ‘M’ conflicting with NEMO flag ‘R’ (Issue 36)
Fixed
Assigning same MNP to different MRs (Issue 37)
Split mobile networks
Out of scope for Basic Support

5. Issues that needed clarification
MNP in a de-registration BU (Issue 30)
No need to include MNP in a de-registration BU. HA removes all associated routes if lifetime of BU is zero
Lifetime in router advertisements sent on egress interface (issue 33)
MUST be set to zero
Prefix Table (MUST or SHOULD) (Issue 34)
Is there a need to check the source address of the outer IPv6 header (Issue 34)
Yes if no IPsec protection
No if there is IPsec protection

6. Issues that needed clarification
Binding Ack status 140 and explicit mode (Issue 34)
Fixed in the current draft. In earlier version the MR was not processing 140 in explicit mode.
Clarifications regarding running a routing protocol and trust between the MR and the HA (Issue 34)
Value of ‘R’ flag in subsequent binding updates (Issue 38)
Should not change
If needs to be changed, the MR must perform de-registration followed by a new home registration