Subject: [nemo] NEMO basic protocol question !!!!

From: "Muhammad Ali Malik" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 12:19:14 +1000

Hi

I will be grateful if someone can answer these questions related to NEMO
basic protocol.

1.	Why it is not possible for mobile network node to obtains the CoA in
foreign location. As NEMO basic protocol states that only MR obtains the
care-of-address.
2.	What do the protocol means that mobility is transparent to mobile network
nodes ….. how can we achieved transparency.

Regards,

Muhammad Ali Malik

---

From: Chan-Wah Ng <[email-masked]>
Date: 31 Jul 2003 10:44:39 +0800

Hello, Muhammad,

Let me try to answer. I am sure others will fill in any gaps in my
answer.

(1) It is possible, but not necessary.  As stated in your question 2,
objective is to achieve mobility transparency for the mobile network
nodes (MNNs).  Since they do not know anything about mobility, there is
no concept of CoA.

(2) It means that the MNNs do not need to know that the MR has changed
its point of attachment.  They do not need to have special protocol
other than those found in any normal IPv6 node.  Specifically, they do
not need to have MIPv6. They continue to use the address configured from
the network prefix announced by MR, and continue to use MR as the
default router.  They will continue to be able to reach, and be reach
by, the Internet.

/rgds
/cwng

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 10:19, Muhammad Ali Malik wrote:
> Hi
> 
>  
> 
> I will be grateful if someone can answer these questions related to
> NEMO basic protocol.
> 
>  
> 
>      1. Why it is not possible for mobile network node to obtains the
>         CoA in foreign location. As NEMO basic protocol states that
>         only MR obtains the care-of-address.
>      2. What do the protocol means that mobility is transparent to
>         mobile network nodes ….. how can we achieved transparency.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Muhammad Ali Malik
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>

---

From: Chan-Wah Ng <[email-masked]>
Date: 31 Jul 2003 10:44:39 +0800

Hello, Muhammad,

/rgds
/cwng

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:56:39 +0200

Muhammad Ali Malik wrote:
> 2. What do the protocol means that mobility is transparent to mobile 
> network nodes ….. how can we achieved transparency.

Abuses of language.

I believe "transparency" was initially proposed to express that, in a
mobile host, layers above IP will communicate with the unchanged
endpoint names of its peer even if some intermediary addresses will
change: those latter changes are transparent, app data beams hardly
bounce on them, mobility is invisible, or transparent, to applications.

In the context of mobile network nodes, the use of word "transparency"
is somehow pushed to its limits and "invisible" would be better.  LFN's
do not see nor process any message exchanges related to mobility.  RA's
don'get through MR, LFN's don't send BU's, don't maintain caches and so
on.  With MN's that visit the mobile network, the first use of
transparency applies.

"Transparency" is a nice word with plenty of positive interpretations
from physics, politics and corporate speak; so having it as a
requirement can only be good.

Is this for a homework?

Alex
GBU

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:56:39 +0200

Abuses of language.

Is this for a homework?

Alex
GBU