Some comments on this thread...
I agree that by default applications should see home addresses not care-of
addresses. This is especially true on correspondent nodes.
The mobility draft has at various points or times talked about swapping the
source address in the IPv6 header and the address in the home address
option. This is OK conceptually and I understand that some implementations
actually work that way. But at least in our implementation, we treat packet
data as read-only. I would not like to see specifications that assumed the
swapping really does happen.
There is a source address selection problem on mobile nodes: when do you use
a home address vs a care-of address? The default source address selection
rules as currently specified don't always produce the desired results.
(There aren't any special rules or provisions for mobility.)
Considering the case of a mobile node initiating a TCP connection to a
global address, with a choice of a global home address and a global care-of
address, I think the desirable default behavior to use the global home
address for the TCP endpoint and insert the home address option (and a
binding-update option in the SYN). I think this is the desirable default
even if the care-of address and the destination address appear to be
topologically closer than the home address and the destination address.
Rich
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
