Subject: Re: [MOBILE-IP] R-P agent should listen on port 434?

From: Patrice Calhoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 11:54:15 -0800

Why *must* they listen on different interfaces? Is it not conceivable that
a PDSN (TR45.6 term for FA with lots of other functionality) can have
a single ethernet interface?

PatC
>
>I disagree.  They are on the same port but different interfaces.  This
>can be done with distinct processes.  UDP sockets are multiplexed
>based on both the port number and the IP address of the interface on
>which they arrive.  The "virtual" interfaces created by the R-P tunnel
>endpoints should be considered as logically distinct from the
>underlying device on which the tunnel is carried.
>
>-Pete
>
>Patrice Calhoun <[email-masked]> (PC) writes:
>
>PC> The fact that they both listen on the same port IMPLIES that the
>PC> current I-D requires that they be one process.
>

---

From: Pete McCann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 15:09:07 -0600

Yes, everything is going over the same ethernet interface, but the
R-P messages are going "raw" IP over ethernet, and the Mobile IP
advertisements/requests are encapsulated inside the R-P GRE tunnel.
Each tunnel has a separate GRE key field and is in fact a separate
logical interface.

-Pete

PC> Why *must* they listen on different interfaces? Is it not conceivable that
PC> a PDSN (TR45.6 term for FA with lots of other functionality) can have
PC> a single ethernet interface?