Re: regarding the re-chartering..

Yes. Currently, the MNID is if the nai format and is overloaded. The MNID
in 3GPP specs is the IMSI-NAI (IMSI@REALM), its based on the IMSI. Ex:
"<IMSI>@epc.mnc<MNC>.mcc<MCC>.3gppnetwork.org²

We also have MAC48@REALM;

We also have approaches to transform MAC to Pseudo IMSI, and then carry
IMSI-NAI as the MN-ID.


So, we need unique sub-types for each of the types/sources.

MN-Id based on IMSI, MSISDN, IMEI, MAC ..

Also, do we need to distinguish between IMSI and IMSI-NAI ?

Sri



On 9/10/14 6:29 AM, "Marco Liebsch" <[email protected]> wrote:

>It seems the MNID is somehow overloaded to carry both, node-specific IDs,
>e.g. MAC, as well as subscriber IDs, which is the IMSI.
>There may be value in adding the IMEI to the list of possible types of
>node-specific IDs.
>
>marco
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli
>>(sgundave)
>>Sent: Dienstag, 9. September 2014 23:30
>>To: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave); Charlie Perkins; [email protected]
>>Cc: Vijay Devarapalli
>>Subject: Re: [DMM] regarding the re-chartering..
>>
>>Two more comments.
>>
>>
>>
>>4.) I'd also use sub-type value of (2) for IMSI. Just to align with the
>>sub-types
>>defined for MN Id defined for ICMP. I suspect there are some
>>implementations
>>already using sub-type (2). Please see the other thread.
>>
>>
>>5.) For each of the sub-types, we need text including examples and some
>>explanation on how they are used.
>>
>>
>>Sri
>>
>>
>>
>>On 9/9/14 2:20 PM, "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Charlie,
>>>
>>>This is good. Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>1.) If EUI-48 and EUI-64 addresses are derived of a 48-bit IEEE 802.2
>>>address, why do we need to two sub-types ? Why not have just one
>>>sub-type for mac based identifiers ?
>>>
>>>2.) Sub type value (1) is currently used. Its currently overloaded for
>>>IMSI-NAI (3GPP specs) and generic NAI based identifiers. Given the
>>>definition of new sub-types, we need some text explaining the
>>>motivation
>>>
>>>3.) Proposed Sub-type value of (2) for IPv6 address. What exactly is
>>>this ? Are these CGA-based IPv6 addresses ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                     New Mobile Node Identifier Types
>>>
>>>               +-----------------+------------------------+
>>>               | Identifier Type | Identifier Type Number |
>>>               +-----------------+------------------------+
>>>               | IPv6 Address    | 2                      |
>>>               |                 |                        |
>>>               | IMSI            | 3                      |
>>>               |                 |                        |
>>>               | P-TMSI          | 4                      |
>>>               |                 |                        |
>>>               | EUI-48 address  | 5                      |
>>>               |                 |                        |
>>>               | EUI-64 address  | 6                      |
>>>               |                 |                        |
>>>               | GUTI            | 7                      |
>>>               +-----------------+------------------------+
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Sri
>>>PS: Good to see Vijay back
>>>
>>>
>>>On 9/9/14 1:28 PM, "Charlie Perkins" <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hello folks,
>>>>
>>>>Here's the last Internet Draft that we did, long ago expired:
>>>>http://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-perkins-mext-4283mnids-01.txt
>>>>
>>>>I'll resubmit it with a few updates as a personal draft to dmm.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Charlie P.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>dmm mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>dmm mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm