Hi,
On 09/24/2012 07:25 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Julien Laganier [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 5:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Henderson, Thomas R
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Status of WG items
Folks,
I've been thinking a bit more about the update of RFC5204 / Rendezvous
Server support. See below:
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Julien Laganier <[email protected]>
wrote:
[...]
- 5204bis (rendezvous) needs one more subsection regarding relaying
of
the UPDATE packet to support double jump of mobile nodes. As this
isn't really useful without the mobility support my proposal is to
tackle this one together with the 5206bis.
I figured two things:
1- relaying an UPDATE packet is pointless in the absence of HIP
mobility support on both endpoints.
2- support for rendezvous server is useful independently of support for
HIP mobility.
Taking both 1. and 2. into account, my conclusion is that it makes
sense to keep the rendezvous server support self-contained in 5203bis,
i.e., without a normative dependency to the mobility support in
5206bis, while 5206 would specify an extension to rendezvous mechanism
for support of relaying UPDATE packets.
Makes sense?
Julien, I would be fine with your proposal.
seems fine to me as well.
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
