Re: Issue#18: Requesting ARs to perform ONLY reverse address translation
Vijay Devarapalli <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.seamoby |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
for CARD to stand alone as a protocol, it does make sense to include a flag in the CARD Request so that the MN can explicity ask the current AR for reverse address translation alone. I very much would like to see this feature. but then we have a problem. if a MN uses a CARD Request just for reverse address translation, then the CARD request does exactly what the ProxyRtrSolicitation does. ofcourse you can include more than one L2 ID in the CARD request, whereas you can include only one L2 ID in ProxyRtrSolicitation. maybe this is okay. I am not sure. do others have an opinion on this? Vijay Marco Liebsch wrote: > issue#18 raised by Vijay on "section 4: CARD protocol operation": > > [Vijay]"lets say, the MN is interested only in reverse address > translation and not in capability information. How does the > MN indicate this to the access router? I think supporting > this is essential." > > [marco]I agree to this and solutions could be very different > (set a flag or append appropriate Preferences sub-option[indicate NO > ATTRIBUTES], ...). > > Maybe a flag is most appropriate for this indication to avoid > superfluous protocol overhead, what do you think? > > marco > > >