Subject: [Dime] MIP6 NAS-HAAA issue #1

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:37:44 +0100

About the issue #1 presented during the Dime WG meeting. If
the ASP/NAS needs to send or the MSA needs to return more than
one HA information the current AVP formulation does not work.
This is because we have defined AVP counts as "at most one".
Furthermore, if we are about to allow "zero or more" AVPs we
need to have a way to group HA address, FQDN, home link prefix
etc together. For that purpose a grouped AVP would be OK.

So the question is (also related to the issue #2) whether 
"zero or more" HAs must be supported. At least the recent
discussion in MIP6 list points to this direction.

Anyway, my personal opinion is that defining a grouped AVP
does-no-harm anyway. Below is one proposal for a grouped AVP:

  MIP6-Info ::= < AVP Header: 297 >
                [ MIP6-Home-Agent-Address ]
                [ MIP6-Home-Agent-FQDN ]
                [ MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix ]
                [ MIP6-Home-Address ]
                ...

Any opinions?

Cheers,
	Jouni

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

---

From: "Gerardo Giaretta" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:38:07 +0100

Again I don't see any reason to send multiple HAs from ASP to MSA.

The other direction makes more sense. The grouped AVP is fine with me.

One side note: the usage of DHCP for HoA assigment is still under
discussion in MIP6.

--Gerardo

---

From: "Julien Bournelle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:12:55 +0100

Hi Jouni, all,

 I'm ok with this grouped AVP.

 Julien