Re: Summary of Transport mode discussion (Was Re: MOBIKE WG Agenda for IETF-64, take 1)

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   This is the summary of the use cases for transport mode SA as far
   as i understand it.
   
   1) SCTP : IKEv2 already supports proposing multiple addresses using
      TSi/TSr. SCTP seems to support a draft where one can add address
      dynamically. MOBIKE needs to be used for supporting that draft.
   
   2) MIP6 : Related to the transport mode SA used in sending Binding updates.
           a) Adding Home address to the peer address set (don't know
              how RR would work for this). Mentioned in Francis' draft. 
           b) Another potential use case is using it for CoA
              authorization check where MOBIKE provides the RR check
              for the CoA in the BU
              (this is different from the one mentioned in Francis' draft)
   
   3) Issue 7: IP-IP tunnel with transport mode SA protection. MOBIKE
      support for updating the tunnel endpoints.
   
   4) TCP connection : Similar to how IKEv2 NAT-T is supported, MOBIKE
      can also be supported.
   
   >From the discussion in the list, 
   
       - it looks like (1) is not that heavily used and so may not
         justify adding support

=> IMHO there is no support to add: we need only an "application note"
explaining how to use IKEv2/2401bis/MOBIKE for SCTP.

       - 2.a and 2.b should at least be discussed in the MIP6 mailing list also
       - (3) may be a more common case that needs to be supported

=> in this case we need a text and a place to put it.

       - 4 may never be implemented today and hence not attractive at all.
   
=> I agree!

   Comments ? Does (3) make sense ?
   
=> it seems easy so as soon as someone has an interest in it...

Thanks

[email protected]