[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipng
Subject:    (IPng 7231) Re: Last Call: Mobility Support in IPv6 to Proposed Standard
From:       "Aaron Griggs" <agriggs () EAST ! ISI ! EDU>
Date:       1999-02-23 13:40:08
[Download RAW message or body]


>
>A small clarification:
>
>> The "care of address" is discovered when the correspondent node receives
a
>> packet from the mobile node with the source address set to the "care of
>> address" and the packet contains a "Home Address" destination option.
The
>> correspondent node caches the binding.
>
>The binding is only cached when the packet contains both a "binding update"
>destination option and a "home address" destination option.
>And the packet must include
> "either an AH or ESP header providing sender authentication, data
integrity
>         protection, and replay protection."
>
Right, thanks for the clarrification.  My main point was to describe why a
node would want to do a second policy lookup when a routing header is
inserted for mobility.  It appeared there was some confusion about this.
Althought this is an implementation detail, the handling of routing headers
by both hosts and security gateways with respect to IPSec processing should
be addressed in the relavent documents (mobility, security architecture).
Rich began the thread with this point.

Thanks,

Aaron



--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]