RE: draft-patel-mipv6-nai-option-00.txt

Hi Kuntal,

> >Hello,
> >
> >While we are breaking away from using a home address as the
> >only MN identifier,
> 
> Can't we use FQDN or NAI as MN identifier during ISAKMP exchange?

I think we still need an identifier along with the BU. I don't know how
you can get away without having one used along the BU.

> > we might as well not limit ourselves to
> >NAI only. I'd recommend defining a TLV for MN identifier, that
> >can carry FQDN and opaque types in addition to NAI and IPv6
> >address types.
> >
> 
> I see no problem adding that. Do you think an opaque TLV of type
"string"
> would suffice?

Alper



> 
> >Alper
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mip6 mailing list
> >Mip6@xxxxxxxx
> >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6
> >