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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
