Re: [nemo] About Test Specification in IPv6 Ready Logo

[Alexandru Petrescu]

Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
> Hi Alex:
>
> I assure you that it is possible to have a NEMO process inject
> routes in an exact same fashion as an OSPF process and benefit from
> the same triggers and redistribution mechanisms if applicable. This
> is what my implementation does in IOS... The HA is definitely a
> router :)

I think implementations can do about anything.

After reading your other emails, I think we still seem to agree that
we want the MR-at-home's LFNs to be reachable from a R on the home
link, without a routing table entry in HA.  It is sufficient for R to
have a route towards MNP.  HA's routing table is not necessary.

Alex

> Pascal
>
> > -----Original Message----- From: Alexandru Petrescu
> > [mailto:alexandru.petrescu@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, November
> > 27, 2006 1:32 PM To: Keiichi SHIMA Cc: nemo@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re:
> > [nemo] About Test Specification in IPv6 Ready Logo
> >
> > Keiichi SHIMA wrote:
> > > On 2006/11/25, at 13:29, Keiichi SHIMA wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > So, even in the case 2, we can put a routing entry for
> > > > > > the mobile network prefix by not using any routing
> > > > > > protocol.
> > > > > Please teach the method of not using routing protocol. Is
> > > > > there draft or RFC ?
> > > > Since a mobile node knows its mobile network prefix, it can 
> > > > install a routing entry for it after it receives a binding
> > > > ack message.  The home agent of the mobile node will know the
> > > > mobile network prefix stored in a binding update message from
> > > > the mobile node, it can also install a routing entry when it
> > > > receives the binding update message.
> > > Some more minor additional notes...
> > >
> > > The above example is for the explicit mode.  And if we use
> > > implicit mode, then these two entities already know what to do
> > > when registration completes.  So either using a dynamic routing
> > > or not is just a configuration issue for route management and
> > > it has nothing to do with the network model.
> > I think it is not right for HA to add a routing table entry upon 
> > reception of MNP in the HA.  IT should add it in the binding
> > cache, not in routing table.
> >
> > The routing table is a data structure touched by other
> > independent software (ifconfig add, route add, routing daemon
> > read).
> >
> > If MIP6-nemo software adds a routing table entry usually it has
> > no way to trigger the routing daemon that reads that routing
> > table.  The routing daemon reads the routing table only once
> > (when it starts up), creating other internal routing tables.  If
> > mip6-demo adds an entry in the kernel routing table then that
> > will not be seen by the routing daemon.  Which is bad.
> >
> > That's why I think the routing table entries between MR and HA
> > must be there prior to starting up the mip6-nemo software.  This
> > is normal in a way: if the MR is at home, we want the HA to still
> > route packets towards LFN, although no BU is sent.
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > > # if I'm not missing something.
> > >
> > > --- Keiichi SHIMA IIJ Research Laboratory <keiichi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > WIDE Project <shima@xxxxxxxxxx>