Hello everyone,
And now, some questions on
draft-nomadv6-mobileip-filters-03.txt.
1. Section 4.1.1 says:
"Filters for Mobile IPv6 is applicable only in the
context of a mobile
node maintaining multiple points of attachment to one or
more
Internet administrative domains. ..."
Why would not it be applicable with single point of
attachment. E.g. the
MN may have multiple CoAs on its single interface but the
end-to-end
characteristics of these CoAs may be different. Cannot it
be?
E.g. packets to different CoAs may be routed on different
paths.
2. Section 4.1.1:
"N When set, the binding agent MUST act based on
the functions
described in section 4.1.3 and add a new entry to
the binding
cache without deleting any existing entries for the
mobile ..."
I guess this does not mean that "if the N bit is set
then the agent
MUST add a new entry". So I think this text should
be deleted or
clarified.
3. What if the N-bit is set and the BU is a CoA
de-registration BU?
E.g. Can a de-registration BU carry a Filter Deletion
Extension?
4. What is the mechanism of matching flows? First match the
destination
address with a HoA and then find the proper CoA using the
filters?
5. Section 4.1.3:
"then a new one will automatically be configured by
each involved
Filtering Agent to the lowest possible Index of 0.
"
What does "configured" mean? Created? So the
Agent would then create
a Default filter for the HoA that has index 0, weight 1
and applies
to any packet? Just because it is not clear from the text.
6. How does the MN specify the Default Filter? With a BU,
N-bit set,
no Filter Modules but only an FCL with index 0? Or can the
Default Filter
be more specific than "match any packet", that
is, specifying with a BU,
N-bit set, Filter Modules and an FCL with index 0?
7. At an agent, does every registered HoA have a Default
Filter
(or rather a Default Binding or Default CoA)?
8. Section 4.1.4:
"binding. If the lifetime of a binding expires or it
is cancelled by
the registration of another mobility binding ..."
Cancellation means "deletion" here? If yes, is
it so that it can happen
only if the MN sends a BU with the N-bit not set while
having multiple
bindings for the corresponding HoA?
What about an RFC3775 de-registration BU? Is that
"cancellation"?
And if "all associated Filters are deleted from the
binding cache" then
what about shared Filters? Do you delete a shared Filter
even if its
still valid for another Binding Cache entry (a Binding)?
Oh, yes, and what is the lifetime of a shared Filter?
9. The first paragraph of Section 4.1.6 is overcomplicated.
Does not it say
that a CoA can be bound to multiple HoAs of the MN?
And in the second paragraph, cannot the MN send the BU for
HoA-A from B
without AltCoA? I think it can.
10. In section 4.1.7 it says:
"points of attachment, the mobile node MUST
de-register all the other
bindings that belong to the same home IP address.
..."
Does the MN need to de-register even at the CNs? Is it for
keeping things
clean and simple? I mean, is the idea that if we are at
the network of a
HoA with an interface then forget this draft for that HoA?
11. Section 4.2:
"When MN requires transferring flow `d to the
interface connected to
FN-B, MN sends a binding update with HoA-2 and CoA-C,
together with
CoA-B in the Alternate care-of-address mobility option
and with the
required filtering extensions (see section 4.1.6).
..."
I guess it is just an example but just in case, I'd like
to note that
the BU could be sent from B without AltCoA.
And also, in the previous paragraph the N-bit was set, and
here no text
about the N-bit. It is obviously set here too, but still.
12. Section 5:
"... in the destination option. Binding updates
without the N
bit set are considered as idle mobility bindings.
..."
Just for clarification, I guess Binding != BU. Rather a
Binding is an
association represented by a Binding Cache Entry.
Is a NOMADv6 BU without N-bit set the same as an RFC3775
BU?
So I guess it's more like "Binding updates without
the N
bit set create idle mobility bindings.". No?
13. So what does this N-bit indicate? Does it indicate that
a) enable multiple bindings for the HoA in this BU
___AND___
b) this BU contains filter description(s)/actions?
14. Section 6.1:
"...Filters will be associated with the registered
care-of address at all
Filtering Agents (HA,CN,MAP). A mobile node that
maintains multiple
points of attachment may request for simultaneous
mobility bindings
by setting the N bit in its binding Updates. ... "
I guess the "...Filters will be associated with the
registered care-of
address at the Filtering Agent (HA, CN or MAP)".
Also, what about a MN with a single point of attachment
having multiple
CoAs? It "may request for simultaneous mobility
bindings" too.
15. A Filter can be shared between different Bindings and a
Binding can be
associated with multiple Filters.
For me this tells that Bindings and Filters should be
allowed to be
handled independently and stored in separate
"Databases". E.g. according
to this draft if you want to change only the CoA of an
existing Binding
at the Filtering Agent then you have to send two BUs. One
for creating a
Binding with the new CoA and associated with the same
Filter and another
BU to remove the other Binding.
BID of draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa-05.txt might
come handy ;)
16. In Section 6.1.2, does the replacing of a shared filter
affect all the
involved Bindings at the Filtering Agent and not only the
one indicated
by this BU?
17. In Section 6.1.5, how can a single BU re-new the
lifetime of all the
Bindings of a HoA?
The lifetime belongs not only to the HoA but to a Binding
and
a Binding is identified by (HoA, CoA). Or not?
18. So Section 6.1.6 and 6.1.7 deletes only filters and does
not touch Bindings?
First sign of handling filters independently from bindings
19. The 1st paragraph of Section 6.1.8 is quite
incomprehensible. Transferring a
filter? FROM where TO where? Like dis-associating a filter
from Binding-A and
associating it with Binding-B?
20. The 2nd paragraph of Section 6.1.8 is lost and is
desperately looking for its
place in the draft . And also:
"... by the corresponding mobility binding. In the
case of
shared Filters, packets of matching flows will get
distributed
between multiple points of attachment with respect to the
Weight
value of each Filter."
I thought a shared Filter was "shared" between
multiple Bindings. Does "shared
Filter" mean a Binding with multiple Filters. Just
because I cannot see how
the weight of a Filter can control distribution on
multiple PoAs.
Should not the weight be associated with Bindings rather
than Filters in this
case?
Or is the semantic of "weight" implementation
specific?
21. Section 6.2:
"Should the Filtering Agent succeed in applying the
Filters, then the
Filtering Acknowledgement indicating the index of the
success MUST be
sent, only if `A bit is set on the Binding Update.
"
What about registration with the HA? No Filtering Ack?
There is BA...
"When a mobility binding expires or is deregistered
by a mobile node
then all associated Filters are deleted with it.
..."
What about shared filters?
22. Section 7:
"once. A Filter Module may include one or more
predicates. ..."
What are predicates? Give me an example of a Filter Module
with multiple
predicates please because I don't get it from the text!
That's all for now
Thanks,
Gabor
_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
Monami6 ietf.org
https:
//www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
|