[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Support for other protocols


On 31/03/2008, at 8:59 PM, George Tsirtsis wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:15 PM, marcelo bagnulo <marcelo@it.uc3m.es> wrote: 
Hi,

during the v6ops meeting, Dave (and maybe others) brought up an issue
about the support for other protocols, like MIPv6, SCTP, DCCP and others. 

Curerently the draft is phrased as follows:

  I6: MIPv6 support
The translation mechanism SHOULD not prevent MIPv6 Route Optimization 
  when the CN is a v4-only node



GT> I am confused about this one. MIP6 RO requires the CN to
participate in MIP6 signaling for the Return Routability tests. How
would an IPv4 only node participate in such an IPv6 specific
signaling?. This makes no sense to me.
I was also thinking if any other MIP related scenario is worth
considering here, e.g., MIP HA inside vs outside the NAT64. MIPv4 and
MIPv6 protocols, however, are entirely incompatible so MIPv4 to MIPv6
translation is not a realistic option as far as I can tell. My
inclination is to just forget about Mobile IP and all its versions and
denominations for now.
=> Agreed. Unless the v6 host can get an IPv4 address, there is no need to consider MIP. Of course, we should make sure that v6 to v6 communications is not affected but that's obvious. 

Hesham




George