Re: Implementations of RFC 4285

Sorry to get into this conversation.

My understanding was that RFC 4285 was developed for use in WiMAX and WiMAX
did have MIPv6 in its plans and this type of security fitted WiMAX very
well.

Behcet

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Hesham,
>
> Yes. We do have implementations and field deployments based on 4285. Its
> supported on number of platforms supporting mobile routers/home agent and
> also a variant used between MAG and LMA.
>
> Regards
> Sri
>
>
>
>
> On 1/23/13 5:53 AM, "Hesham Soliman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I was discussing this with Brian off-line and thought the list might know
> >more. Does anyone know of RFC 4285 implementations?
> >
> >The reason I ask is that it seems we have a conflict in an error code
> >(144) interpretation between RFCs 5555 and 4285. Obviously 5555 shouldn't
> >have used error code 144 for that purpose but it slipped passed us all it
> >seems. So, it would be good to know if there are any 4285 implementations
> >out there to see if there is a problem already in practice between the two
> >RFCs.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Hesham
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >dmm mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm