Frank Quick: In section 10.3.1: "To begin processing the Binding Update, the home agent MUST perform the following sequence of tests: ... o A Home Address destination option MUST be present in the message. ..." 11.7.1 says essentially the same thing on page 131: " o The packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option, giving the mobile node's home address for the binding." This seems to moot some of the text in 11.7.1, page 132: "The mobile node MUST use its home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding Updates sent to the home agent." This sentence implies that the node has the option of EITHER/OR whereas the preceding text would say the node MUST include the Home Address destination option, and (presumably) MAY also use the home address as the Source Address. I'd suggest that this sentence be deleted, or amended to reflect the fact that the home address as Source Address is allowed but the destination option is mandatory. ------------ Vijay Devarapalli: Issue 332 needs some clarification. Home Address option MUST be present in the BU if the BU is sent from a visited link. If the BU is sent from the home link (a de-registration BU from home), the Home Address option MAY be omitted. in this case, the source address is used as the home address. ------------ Jari Arkko: How about this. In Section 10.3.1, change o A Home Address destination option MUST be present in the message. => o A Home Address destination option MUST be present in the message (unless the home address appears as the source address). In Section 11.7.1, change o The packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option, giving the mobile node's home address for the binding. => o The packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option (unless it is sent with the home address as the source address), giving the mobile node's home address for the binding. This seems clear enough. But I worry a bit that we're forgetting something; I can't remember why text was written the way it is. ------------ Jari: Actually, after thinking about this again the change would break things. Right now, we have separated registrations and de-registrations to different sections, and that's why 10.3.1 and 11.7.1 require the HAO. Section 10.3.2 should not require it however. So I take my text proposal back and instead suggest that we replace in Section 11.7.1 the following: The mobile node MUST use its home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding Updates sent to the home agent. with The mobile node MUST use its home address in Binding Updates sent to the home agent. ------------ Ed Remmell: I've read through the issue text, and I don't think we want to make any changes to draft 24 for this issue. I think that the current draft text: > The mobile node MUST use its > home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in > the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding > Updates sent > to the home agent. is clearer and more helpful than your proposed modification: > > The mobile node MUST use its home address in Binding Updates sent > to the home agent. The current text that you propose changing is in a part of section 11.7.1 that is discussing interaction with Ipsec, it is followed by: " This is necessary in order to allow the Ipsec policies to be matched with the right home address." The current text is more general than just the topic of registering a new primary care-of address, and I think that's OK because the section header is also more general: "11.7.1 Sending Binding Updates to the Home Agent". ------------ Brian Haley: The final edits on the issue list for 327 and 331 look ok, but I would leave 332 alone as Ed suggested. ------------ Vijay Devarapalli: it might be a good idea to fix this. this has been a source for lot of confusion and needs to be clarified. this question has come up many times. we need something very simple which says Home Address Option MUST be there if binding updates are sent from a visited link. if binding updates are sent from the home link, Home Address Option MAY be ommitted. the text in section 10.3.1 and 11.7.1 can stay the same because they talk about sending binding updates. but section 10.3.2 which talks about de-registration has to have a sentence which says, if the MN has sent a de-registration BU, it may not include a Home Address Option and the source address should be used as the home address. ------------ Ed Remmel: What about expanding the first sentence of the second paragraph of section 10.3.2: Old text: " A Binding Update is validated and authorized in the manner described in the previous section." New text: " A Binding Update is validated and authorized in the manner described in the previous section; note that when the mobile node deregisters when it is at home, it may not include the Home Address destination option, in which case the mobile node's home address is the source IP address of the deregistration Binding Update." ------------ Vijay Devarapalli: This is fine with me. ------------ Brian Haley: Looks good, thanks Ed. ------------ Jari Arkko: This is OK for me. I think we have an agreement on this one now, so I've add this to the list of modifs to be sent to the RFC editor. ------------