Re: Issue 46 (was: protocol draft status and moving forward)
Tero Kivinen <[email protected]> Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:56:06 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mobike |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Mohan Parthasarathy writes:
> Why does one have to indicate that they have
> NO_ADDITIONAL_ADDRESSES ? If i don't send
> ADDITIONAL_IP* notification then you just have one
> address to operate with. What is the use of explicitly
> indicating this ? Also, ADDITIONAL_IP with zero
> address can do the same i guess i.e ADDITIONAL_IP*
> replaces the previous list with zero or more
> addresses.
Ok, lets add explination about that too:
The NO_ADDITIONAL_ADDRESSES notify is needed, as otherwise it
would not be possible to distinguish empty DPD message from
address update message that does not have any additional
addresses. Now we can distinguish them, as DPD is empty
INFORMATIONAL exchange and address update with no extra addresses
is INFORMATIONAL exchange having only N(NO_ADDITIONAL_ADDRESSES).
Both of them can have other additional payloads like N(COOKIE2)
etc.
--
[email protected]