Mobile IPv6 Mobile IPv6 Connectathon 2003 2003 Connectathon IETF56 IETF56 Interoperability Testing Report Interoperability Testing Report Samita Chakrabarti Samita Chakrabarti Samita. .chakrabarti chakrabarti@Sun.com @Sun.com Samita
Connectathon 2003 ( 2003 ( March 2 ) Connectathon 6 ) March 2 – – 6 Implementation/Test Participants Implementation/Test Participants Cisco Cisco HP- -True64 True64 HP HP- -UX UX HP University Of Helsinki University Of Helsinki KEIO University KEIO University NEC NEC Nokia Nokia Samsung Samsung Network Associates(Analyzer) Network Associates(Analyzer) TAHI (Conformance Tests for ID- -20 and ID 20 and ID- -19) 19) TAHI (Conformance Tests for ID UNH (Interoperability Tests) UNH (Interoperability Tests) Sun (Technology Co- -ordination) ordination) Sun (Technology Co 2 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Connectathon ad ad- -hoc testing topology hoc testing topology Connectathon MIPv6 Test MIPv6 Test R R Subnet Subnet MN MN Cthon subnet Cthon subnet CN CN HA HA Private Test subnet Private Test subnet MN MN Each booth had 3 drops Each booth had 3 drops 3 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Connectathon2003: Implementations Connectathon2003: Implementations HA 7 implementations HA 7 implementations CN 7 implementations CN 7 implementations MN 6 implementations MN 6 implementations 1 MIPv6 Network Analyzer Analyzer implementation implementation 1 MIPv6 Network : More breakdown on a particular implementation functionality : More breakdown on a particular implementation functionality 3 3 HA- -CN CN- -MN MN HA 2 2 HA- -CN CN HA 3 ( ALL 3 ( MN- -CN CN ALL MNs MNs performed Route performed Route Optimization Optimization) ) MN 2 HA (only) 2 HA (only) 4 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Connectathon2003: Drafts Connectathon2003: Drafts All implementations supported All implementations supported Draft- -ietf ietf- -mobileip mobileip- -ipv6 ipv6- -20.txt 20.txt Draft (TAHI Conformance and UNH Interoperability Tests TAHI Conformance and UNH Interoperability Tests ( were performed on them ) ) were performed on them 2 implementations supported : 2 implementations supported : draft- -ietf ietf- -mobileip mobileip- -mipv6 mipv6- -ha ha- -ipsec ipsec draft draft draft ( No TAHI conformance or UNH Interoperability tests No TAHI conformance or UNH Interoperability tests ( were performed on HA- were performed on HA -MN MN IPSec IPSec features features) ) 5 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Connectathon2003: MIPv6 Internet Testing Connectathon2003: MIPv6 Internet Testing The Connectathon Connectathon Consensus Consensus ☺ ☺ The MIPv6 Internet Testing would be beneficial between major interop interop MIPv6 Internet Testing would be beneficial between major � � events events A mailing alias would be set up for further discussion on this topic opic A mailing alias would be set up for further discussion on this t � � Presentation on this topic and other MIPv6 talks are found at Presentation on this topic and other MIPv6 talks are found at � � http://www.connectathon connectathon.org .org http://www. 6 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Spec Issues Spec Issues No Major Issues No Major Issues Issues have been posted and discussed on the mobileip Issues have been posted and discussed on the mobileip alias alias Section 11.5.4 should clarify that MN should respond to HA’s HA’s Section 11.5.4 should clarify that MN should respond to 1. 1. NS as a result of de- -registration BU from MN to HA registration BU from MN to HA NS as a result of de MN movement detection may fail if the implementation uses MN movement detection may fail if the implementation uses 2. 2. only NUD for default router address or only Prefix information only NUD for default router address or only Prefix information from RA from RA Draft should clarify that HOTI/COTI/BU MUST not include RH Draft should clarify that HOTI/COTI/BU MUST not include RH 3. 3. and use home- and use home -address as address as dst dst when doing RO between two when doing RO between two MNs MNs Should a CN send BE to MN when it receives BU with H bit ? Should a CN send BE to MN when it receives BU with H bit ? 4. 4. Section 9.5.1 : Is the value 32784 correct ? Section 9.5.1 : Is the value 32784 correct ? 5. 5. 7 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Spec Issues Spec Issues Should the spec specify that HA MUST not respond to a NS with Should the spec specify that HA MUST not respond to a NS with 6. 6. src=HOA while it’s defending that HOA ? =HOA while it’s defending that HOA ? src CN should always send ICMPv6 or BE messages to source CN should always send ICMPv6 or BE messages to source 7. 7. address of the incoming packet without BCE lookup (clarification address of the incoming packet without BCE lookup (clarification only) only) Can HA be CN for the same mobile node ? i.e. Should a HA/CN Can HA be CN for the same mobile node ? i.e. Should a HA/CN 8. 8. node ignore a BU (H bit on) while it’s serving as a CN for the node ignore a BU (H bit on) while it’s serving as a CN for the particular MN ? particular MN ? Special Thanks to TAHI and UNH Test groups Special Thanks to TAHI and UNH Test groups 8 IETF56 March 17, 2003
Recommend
More recommend
