[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2401bis Issue # 86 -- Add IPv6 mobility header message typeas selector



Jari,

	See reply below.

>Karen Seo wrote:
>>Folks,
>>
>>Here's a description and proposed approach for:
>>
>>IPsec Issue #:  86
>>
>>Title:        Add IPv6 mobility header message type as selector
>>
>>
>>Description:
>>============
>>On 7/11/03, Francis Dupont posted a message to the ipsec-policy 
>>working group in which he, among other things, asked that we add 
>>the IPv6 mobility header message type (MH Type) as a selector. (For 
>>details, see 
>>http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-24.txt).
>>
>>Should we add the IPv6 mobility header message type (MH Type) as a selector?
>
>Yes. Future protection of mobility signaling using IPsec could
>then benefit from the higher granularity of the selectors and
>policies.

	Sounds good.

>(Question: did you already cover ICMP types in some earlier
>update?)

	Only the PMTU discovery aspect has been written up so far
	(plus the 3 cases of dropped packets where we proposed sending
	an ICMP unreachable.)  We have done a couple of passes on
	writing up the ICMP issues, but I haven't yet completed the
	next revision.   I'm probably going to need to wait for Steve's
	input before it will be ready to send out, so it might not go
	out until after 10/13.  But there will definitely be a 2401bis
	writeup on this topic.

>
>>Proposed approach:
>>==================
>>Modify 2401bis along the following lines:
>>
>>1. Change "upper layer protocol" to "next layer protocol". (We made 
>>this change to AH and ESP previously.)
>>2. Add the mobility header as another possible "next layer" protocol
>>3. Add mobility header type (MH Type) to the list of selectors 
>>supported in the SPD and in IKEv2.
>>4. The processing text stays the same.
>
>Agree.

	Thank you.


Karen