Hi Alexandru,
A quick HMIPv6 comment below.
Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
If IPv6 has a better anonymity solution, can someone point me to it?
Or do I have to start working on NATv6? (See, this is why I don't
always want to identify myself! :-)
See RFC 3041 - It does exa
Hi Greg,
Greg Daley wrote:
There is no problem with the RCoA and LCoA differing only in prefix
if the LCoA and RCoA are based on RFC3041 addresses.
A-ha, that sounds like a tangible goal. I mean there is a big
if in your phrasing. I still need to understand how this would work
in practice (answ
> Alper Yegin wrote:
>> I don't quite understand this... All CN knows is the RCoA of the
>> MN. Only LCoA can reveal the location of the MN within the network.
>> And CN cannot figure out LCoA by looking at RCoA.
>
> What's the difference between a RCoA and a LCoA of a same MN? In my
> understa
Hi Alper,
Just a quick note.
Alper Yegin wrote:
[much text cut]
To me, there are some common points, but there are also huge
differences. I'm thinking about in NAT there is a specific set of
types of addresses (the not publicly-routable) that can be reused by
any site at will. However, with HMI
Hi Alper, Greg. I'm not flaming, and not try to generate any heat :-)
Greg Daley wrote:
That's right. This gives the option to use LCoA with a CN if MN
wants to. So, location privacy is an optional feature for MN to
use, unlike with the NATs.
Actually, I think that MN can decide about its use o
Alex,
> So, an idea is that the location privacy might be a problem, and that
> Mobile IPv6 might offer a site-local-free solution for that problem,
> and that HMIPv6 needs site locals in order to provide a solution to
> that problem.
This is not a correct conclusion. As I have explained earlier
Alper, I tried to draw a logic conclusion from this:
-I assumed LCoA and RCoA have same last 64 bits
-I was countered that that is not absolutely necessary, and that rfc
3041 could be used.
-I replied: yes, could, but it is not.
-I was pointed that site-locals might be used too.
-so I concluded.
Th
