Re: comments on draft-larsson-v6ops-mip-scenarios-00.txt

[Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>]

on 2004-11-19 9:03 pm Pekka Savola said the following:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Soliman, Hesham wrote:
>> > (Also to Hesham.)
>> >
>> > Hesham was stating that this stuff already exists, MIPv4 is doing it
>> > already.
>> >
>> > BUT REMEMBER, YOU'RE PLUGGING THAT FUNCTIONALITY TO MIPV6 NOW!
>> >
>> > Clear enough? :)  Sorry for yelling.
>>
>> => And? Actually, HMIPv6 has this feature already. So it's not
>> entirely new to MIPv6.
> 
> This doesn't help because it seems to be kind of using stateless 
> address autoconfiguration mechanisms, so it's entirely dependant on 
> v6.  You cannot deploy similar technology for v4.

Mmm, not true, I believe:

If you have an IPv6 Home Address, but are using MIP4 as mobility
protocol, this implies that your Home Agent handles IPv6, and that
your Home Agent, although talking MIP4 with the Mobile, has to
be able to act as a IPv6 Home Agent in handling the packet routing
and IPv6 home address of the MN.  Nothing of this is particularly
weird, and is well described in the MIP6 spec, no?

What's more, we had a grade student doing an experimental
implementation of running IPv6 packets over MIP4 in 3 or 4
months at ipUnplugged, so there is some basis for saying that
I don't see this as incredibly complex.

> With v4, at least (and possibly with v6, depending on the solution), 
> the home agent will have to keep some DHCP-like "address pool". 
> Putting that code in the MIPv6 HA function is a non-trivial exercise.

Having implemented the same for an MIP4 HA myself, I would claim that
it's not rocket science at all - it's mostly a matter of taking existing
dhclient code and setting up communication between that and the MIP
daemon.

	Henrik