> => don't forget you still can use a bidirectional tunnel with your home > agent, so this is a constraint for the standard mode of MIPv6, > not the anti-optimized but optionaly really secure mode ((secure) bidir > tunnel). We have already some problems with the (route) optimized mode, > I believe we shouldn't like to lost standard mode too.
AAA-based solution would allow you to keep the standard mode, but at a cost which would propably prevent some good size fraction of nodes from using the optimised mode. The BCE check solution allows you to keep the optimised mode in wide usage, but does force you to go back to bidirectional tunneling if you didn't do RO. Take your pick what is the right tradeoff here, but my preference is the last one. > or my access-paid-by-visa WLAN. > > => I believe this is not a WLAN but a network of WLANs (i.e. a WWAN made > with WLANs). In this case the problem is very easy to use, even > statically (i.e. with a home address bound to the VISA account). > Of course I expect the mobile support will be in the offered service list, > something we all like to get but perhaps is not understood by operators... Right. You expect the support to be there. So, instead of me turning on MIPv6 when my code supports it and your code supports it, we have to wait five years before VISA deploys the technology for both of us. And for that, we get to pay a montly service fee! By the way, didn't we already decide that a global infrastructure linking people to their home addresses was out of the question? I don't think it matters whether the acronym for this infrastructure was PKI, DNS, or AAA? Jari -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
