Hi all, After some discussions on the list and off list, it became clear that NUD support would be required unless we can have some analysis of how lower layer can maintain reachability within the 3GPP network. However, since time is not on our side, the authors would like to suggest that this work can be done in further updates of the RFC, if required. For now, we would like to suggest that we go with alternative 3, which was sent earlier last week by Jari. It seemed like we had concensus on that text.
I've copied the text from Jari's earlier mail: So hopefully this covers part of the problem. We still have to deal with NUD. We already stated earlier that NUD is mandatory. My understanding is that the discussion relates to the kind of advice we can give to NUD for the suppression of the messages: 1) From the PDP context positive feedback all the way up to and including a working GGSN IP layer, even if this is strictly speaking lower layer from the point of view of the cellular host. 2) From the upper layers, without mentioning specifics. Basically exactly what RFC 2461 says. 3) From the upper layers, with some specific 3GPP guidance. For instance, SIP is heavily used over UDP. It might make sense to state that a SIP application should give the progress information it has to the UDP layer (which doesn't get any progress information) so that it can tell this information to IP. Hesham -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------