Hi Shuresh. Thanks for your quick and kind reply. Please see the inline answer.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 8:12 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Revision results of hiopt document > > Hi Heejin, > I have read the latest revision of the document. It looks > very good. > It has addressed all my comments from -11. > > New Comments > ============ > > * Precedence: The following pieces of text are potentially conflicting > > Section 4.3: The provided multiple options SHOULD be listed > in order of > preference. multiple sub-options also SHOULD be listed in order of > preference within a single option. > > Section 4.1: When provided with more than one Home Network > Information options having the different id-types or multiple > sub-options for the same id-type, the mobile node is required > to have a selection mechanism to determine which one to use > for establishing a Mobile IPv6 session. > > I think it is better to change section 4.1 to use the same > algorithm specified in 4.3 Ok. That part in Section 4.1 will be changed as below. New> When provided with more than one Home Network Information options having the different id-types or multiple sub-options for the same id-type, the mobile node SHOULD choose the information to use for establishing a Mobile IPv6 session according to preference order. > * There is also some new text added that I would like to > comment upon. > It looks like you have added support for DSMIPv6 in this > document. I am fine with that, but I am confused as to why > you would use a new option to carry BOTH IPv6 and IPv4 > addresses when there is already an option to carry an IPv6 > address for a HA. Isn't it simpler to just add an option for > an IPv4 HA address? This way you can remove one conflict > scenario where the IPv6 in sub-option 4 differs from the one > in sub-option 3 Originally, the reason to define new sub-option for dsmip HA is to couple its IPv4 & IPv6 addresses for the same HA with dual-stack. But I cannot find much advantage for the coupling, and think it would be better to follow your suggestion. Then the server also provides the information for IPv4-only HA. Old> Sec 3.1.1 4 A pair of IPv6 and IPv4 addresses of dual-stacked home agent When the Sub-opt-code is set to 4, it MUST contain both of IPv6 and IPv4 addresses of the dual-stacked home agent which can serve for both Mobile IPv6 and Mobile IPv4. A 128-bit IPv6 address is followed by a 32-bit IPv4 address in this field. Sec 3.2.1 3 A pair of IPv6 and IPv4 addresses of dual-stacked home agent The same with the above. New> Sec 3.1.1 4 IPv4 home agent address When the Sub-opt-code is set to 4 , it MUST contain the 32-bit IPv4 address of the home agent which is equipped with IPv4 stack only or with dual stack. Sec 3.2.1 3 IPv4 home agent address The same with the above. - Best regards, Heejin. > Thanks > Suresh > > > Heejin Jang wrote: > > Hi, Suresh. > > > > I've submitted a new version of hiopt document which > reflected your comments. > > The draft was modified as I proposed and you agreed > previously except > > one comment as I've sent an email about it previously. > > > > Kindly see the attached file and let me know you agree with > all the fixes. > > Thanks for your kind help. :) > > > > - Best regards > > Heejin. > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
