|
List Info
Thread: RE: Re: Fmipv6
|
|
| RE: Re: Fmipv6 |
|
2007-04-05 03:06:25 |
|
Dear Mohan &Rajiv,
Actually our implementation for FMIP6
is in user space. 200+ ms which i mentioned is for 3 things
1. Configuring IP6 addrss on the interface.
2. Create the Route for NCoA.
3. Sending NA.& FNA and then
at NAR side make neighbor entry at reachable which we had already made
for NoA incomplete state.
The point is that when adding
a new addr after receiving BAck is not immediately usable since there
is a certain delay during which the address is considered by the
kernel to be TENTATIVE (e.g. because of DAD) and messages sent with that
address as source would be rejected by the kernel.
After receiving the FBAck when we configure
the IPv6 global address at interface kernel start DAD for that address
which i have already
disable in kernel (No Dad) But i couldn't
remove the time taken by Creating routing table entry. Actually all this
things came in my mind when i have seen the UNA (ICMP Type) in place of
FNA (MH type).
Regards
Anurag Uxa
"Kandra Mohan-a22098"
<mohanbabu motorola.com>
04/05/2007 01:09 PM
|
|
To
| "Rajeev Koodli" <rajeev.koodlinokia.com>,
"ext Anurag Uxa" <Anurag.Uxalntinfotech.com>
|
cc
| <mipshopietf.org>
|
|
Subject
RE: [Mipshop] Re: Fmipv6 | | |
|
Hi Anurag,
I don’t understand the need
of sending NA before FNA. Also, as Rajeev pointed, the delay (200+ms) which
you are saving with the UNA message seems high.
Could you please let me know
how you are able to reduce this delay with UNA message.
Some points that need to be
considered with the introduction of UNA message:
1. In
reactive mode, if MN is going to sent FBU immediately after UNA, then there
will be packet loss in case of duplicate address. But the same loss won’t
be there when we use FNA[FBU] message.
2. with
UNA, in case of duplicate address, additional burden at PAR to delete or
modify the tunnel that was created based on wrong NCOA (received with FBU
send immediately after UNA).
Regards,
Mohan
-----Original Message-----
From: Rajeev Koodli [mailto:rajeev.koodlinokia.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 3:28 AM
To: ext Anurag Uxa
Cc: STDS-802-21listserv.ieee.org; mipshopietf.org
Subject: [Mipshop] Re: Fmipv6
Can you provide some information about your system?
What are the interfaces used, what platform OS? And, how you are able to
save on the delay, which seems high BTW.
Thanks,
-Rajeev
On 4/4/07 6:04 AM, "ext Anurag Uxa" <Anurag.Uxalntinfotech.com>
wrote:
Dear Rajeev,
Thanks man for converting FNA to UNA in your new draft "Fast
Handovers for Mobile IPv6 draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-01.txt".
We have implemented Fmip6 for multiple interfaces. Now we are able
to save almost 200+ ms. which we were wasting on NA for rechable
and then FNA.
Regards
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anurag Uxa
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( ) L&T Infotech Proprietary & Confidential
(+) L&T Infotech Confidential
( ) L&T Infotech Internal Use only
( ) General Business Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
|
| RE: Re: Fmipv6 |
 
United States |
2007-04-05 03:58:03 |
|
Hi Anurag,
; Do
you mean those three steps are not required with the introduction of UNA? I
think steps 1 and 2 are still required.
; Also,
I didn’;t get your third point. What is the need of NA before FNA?
; Regards,
; Mohan ;
-----Original Message-----
From: Anurag Uxa
[mailto:Anurag.Uxalntinfotech.com]
Sent: Thursday, April
05, 2007 1:36 PM
To: Kandra Mohan-a22098
Cc: mipshopietf.org; Rajeev
Koodli
Subject: RE: [Mipshop] Re: Fmipv6
Dear Mohan &Rajiv,
Actually
our implementation for FMIP6 is in user space. 200+ ms which i mentioned is for
3 things
1.
Configuring IP6 addrss on the interface.
2.
Create the Route for NCoA.
3.
Sending NA.& FNA and then at NAR side make neighbor entry at
reachable which we had already made for NoA incomplete state.
The
point is that when adding a new addr after receiving BAck is not
immediately usable since there is a certain delay during which the
address is considered by the kernel to be TENTATIVE (e.g. because of DAD) and
messages sent with that address as source would be rejected by the kernel.
After
receiving the FBAck when we configure the IPv6 global address at interface
kernel start DAD for that address which i have already
disable
in kernel (No Dad) But i couldn't remove the time taken by Creating routing
table entry. Actually all this things came in my mind when i have seen the UNA
(ICMP Type) in place of FNA (MH type).
Regards
Anurag
Uxa
|
"Kandra
Mohan-a22098" <mohanbabumotorola.com>
04/05/2007 01:09 PM
|
|
To
|
"Rajeev Koodli"
<rajeev.koodlinokia.com>, "ext Anurag Uxa"
<Anurag.Uxalntinfotech.com>
|
|
cc
|
<mipshopietf.org>
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [Mipshop] Re: Fmipv6
|
|
Hi Anurag,
I don’t understand the need of sending NA before FNA.
Also, as Rajeev pointed, the delay (200+ms) which you are saving with the UNA
message seems high.
Could you please let me know how you are able to reduce this
delay with UNA message.
Some points that need to be considered with the introduction
of UNA message:
1.
In reactive mode, if MN
is going to sent FBU immediately after UNA, then there will be packet loss in
case of duplicate address. But the same loss won’t be there when we use
FNA[FBU] message.
2.
with UNA, in case of
duplicate address, additional burden at PAR to delete or modify the tunnel that
was created based on wrong NCOA (received with FBU send immediately after UNA).
Regards,
Mohan
-----Original
Message-----
From: Rajeev Koodli [mailto:rajeev.koodlinokia.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 3:28 AM
To: ext Anurag Uxa
Cc: STDS-802-21listserv.ieee.org; mipshopietf.org
Subject: [Mipshop] Re: Fmipv6
Can you provide some information about your system?
What are the interfaces used, what platform OS? And, how you are able to save
on the delay, which seems high BTW.
Thanks,
-Rajeev
On 4/4/07 6:04 AM, "ext Anurag
Uxa" <Anurag.Uxalntinfotech.com> wrote:
Dear Rajeev,
Thanks man for converting FNA to UNA in your new draft "Fast
Handovers for Mobile IPv6 draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-01.txt". We
have implemented Fmip6 for multiple interfaces. Now we are able to save
almost 200+ ms. which we were wasting on NA for rechable and then FNA.
Regards
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anurag Uxa
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( ) L&T Infotech Proprietary & Confidential
(+) L&T Infotech Confidential
( ) L&T Infotech Internal Use only
( ) General Business Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
|
[1-2]
|
|
|
about | contact Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )
|