Re: RE: AD request / L2 Triggers Charter Statement/ Updated Internet-Draft on Fast Router Discovery

Hello. Alper E. Yegin.
Thank you for your kind answer.
I would like to ask additional questions.

1. You said, "this protocol is limited to nodes on the same IP subnet. Therefore protocol messages would not normally go beyond routers." 
Is this limitation necessary? In some case, L2 trigger message needs to go beyond one IP subnet. For example, old AP and new AP may be in different IP subnet. 

+------+                   +------+
 |  AR   | ------------  |  AR   |
+------+                   +------+
    |                                 |
    |                                 |
+------+                   +------+
 |  AP   |                     |  AP   |
+------+                   +------+
     |
     |
+------+
 |  MN  | ---------->
+------+

In IAPP protocol, APs in different IP subnet can exchange UDP messages. Is it necessary to limit this protocol within just one IP subnet? It may be better to relax this restriction.

2. In I-D, you indicated a carrier is meant, like defining a protocol "based on" UDP". 

Is it only for IPv4 or does this include IPv6 too? In IPv6, it may be better to use ICMP or Extension Header to carry L2 trigger. For example, in Mobile IPv4, Binding update is using UDP. But in Mobile IPv6, Binding Update is using Mobility Header. Would you explain why you choose UDP instead of ICMP or Extension Header?


_______________________________________________
pilc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pilc
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pilc-charter.html
http://pilc.grc.nasa.gov/