Let me see if I can answer: > In fact, my question is much simple, that is: when a mobile node moves to a > new subnet where another node occasionally uses the same identifer as the > mobile node, should the mobile node renumber its identifier?
Simply put: this needs to never happen. That creates the potential for a collision within the same locator. It's up to the administrator of that local subnet to ensure that there's some mechanism for resolving this. Note that it does not mean that the mobile node much change its identifier, just that it needs to not use that identifier while the other node could possibly appear. One alternate approach would be for it to have a temporary, local identifier purely for use within that subnet. Or, there can be some mechanism that prevents the other node from connecting. > if so, can the > established session using that identifier survives after idenfifier > renumbering? Certainly. Again, the identifier does not need to be abandoned. The only restriction is that there are not two systems with the same locator and same identifier at the same time. For example, if a node is going to make use of the temporary identifier that I hallucinated above, then it could return to its permanent identifier when it leaves the locator where there's a conflict. If the timing permits, the session can continue. > if not, how could the last-hop router distinguishes these two > hosts when forwarding packets destined to one of them? The last-hop router might well distinguish the two based on the link layer address and knowing which one is active at present. > Could you please tell me in which I-D and which section the above question > has been answered. Thus I can find the answer quickly. Thanks. This is all in the base ILNP spec. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
