Re: TISPAN proposal for PPP IPCP extension to handleP-CSCFaddress???

Folks, since somebody referred to my earlier posting, let me throw some 
of our experience.

After the discussion in the mailing list in 2005, we ended up using 
DHCPINFORM instead for P-CSCF discovery in our testbed. It works. We had 
some problem in making the DHCPINFORM working over PPP link however, but 
we sorted it out later on.

Thanks
Ashutosh


Jerome Moisand wrote:
> All right, DHCPINFORM would work, sounds a bit contorted to mix PPP and
> DHCP, but why not. This is what 3GPP2 does, I believe. 
> 
> Thanks for the historical background.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Carlson [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 10:21 AM
> To: Jerome Moisand
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Pppext] TISPAN proposal for PPP IPCP extension to
> handleP-CSCFaddress???
> 
> Jerome Moisand writes:
>> Providing a SIP-proxy (P-CSCF) server @ via IPCP does make sense
> though.
> 
> Not to me.
> 
>> Might be a good idea to address the problem in a constructive manner,
>> adding a mechanism for vendor-specific (or organization-specific)
>> parameters that could be conveyed via IPCP.
> 
> See RFC 2153.  We already have a vendor-specific extension mechanism
> for PPP.
> 
>> Allowing extensions without
>> creating interoperability problems, and without the burden of having
> to
>> go to IETF for defining such extensions. 
> 
> Actually, it still does cause interoperability problems, as it forces
> everyone else (over time) to implement these unnecessary extensions.
> 
>> DHCP and many other protocols have such extensibility, why not IPCP?
> 
> IPCP configures the network layer.  IP addresses on the link are
> network layer properties, but SIP server addresses are application
> properties.
> 
> Note that RFC 1877 is a Microsoft-proprietary extension.
> 
>> Was this topic discussed in the past?
> 
> Many, many times; see the archives for discussions about SIP server
> addresses, DNS server addresses, and other bits of application
> configuration.  You can use DHCP to handle this application issue, and
> it works fine over PPP.  DHCPINFORM seems particularly well-suited to
> the job, and it's the long-established consensus of the working group
> participants that we don't need IPCP extensions like that.
> 

_______________________________________________
Pppext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext