Subject: RE: [mobile-ip] RE: [nemo] multiple CoAs registration

From: Soliman Hesham <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 03:43:11 -0400

=> By other attributes of that binding: CoA, CN's address, port nos, 
flow label ...etc

Hesham

---

From: Ryuji Wakikawa<[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 06:25:16 +0900

Hi Hesham,

At Fri, 25 Jul 2003 03:43:11 -0400,
Soliman Hesham wrote:
> 
>  >  > I don't think we have consensus on using the HoA to identify 
>  > >  > a binding.
>  > > 
>  > > => We have a MIPv6 (RFC now!) that says that the HoA
>  > > is used to identify a binding in the binding cache.
>  > > So I'd say we have concensus on that.
>  > 
>  > I am talking about the case when multiple CoAs are bounded to a HoA.
>  > When two bindings have same HoA, how do you identify each 
>  > binding with same HoA?
> 

CoA can not be used to identify binding, because it is changed. 
I wrote some comments before (I replied to Nicolas)

maybe by filter information, but you can not identify two bindings if
MN does not have filter information. Filter information is not always
mandatory information. There are several approaches to maintain
filter information.

I prefer using ID to identify bindings and may associate filter
information with the IFID somewhere (maybe binding cache, maybe not).
This approach gives space for policy management and its
implementation.

regards,
ryuji

---

From: Nicolas Montavont <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 11:00:50 +0200

>This approach gives space for policy management and its
Yes but I am not sure that an Interface ID is the better way to have a 
unique identifier of a binding...

Nicolas