Mobility Support in IPv6
draft-ietf-mext-rfc3775bis-13

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>,
    mext mailing list <mext@ietf.org>,
    mext chair <mext-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Mobility Support in IPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mext-rfc3775bis-13.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Mobility Support in IPv6'
  (draft-ietf-mext-rfc3775bis-13.txt) as a Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Ralph Droms and Jari Arkko.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mext-rfc3775bis/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

  This document specifies Mobile IPv6, a protocol which allows nodes to
  remain reachable while moving around in the IPv6 Internet.  Each
  mobile node is always identified by its home address, regardless of
  its current point of attachment to the Internet.  While situated away
  from its home, a mobile node is also associated with a care-of
  address, which provides information about the mobile node's current
  location.  IPv6 packets addressed to a mobile node's home address are
  transparently routed to its care-of address.  The protocol enables
  IPv6 nodes to cache the binding of a mobile node's home address with
  its care-of address, and to then send any packets destined for the
  mobile node directly to it at this care-of address.  To support this
  operation, Mobile IPv6 defines a new IPv6 protocol and a new
  destination option.  All IPv6 nodes, whether mobile or stationary,
  can communicate with mobile nodes.  This document addresses a number
  of issues in RFC 3775, which are listed in Appendix B, and obsoletes
  RFC 3775.

Working Group Summary

  The normal WG process was followed and the document revisions have been 
  discussed for over two years. The document as it is now, reflects WG
  consensus, with nothing special worth noting. 

Document Quality

  The document was given adequate reviews. The Document Shepherd has
  no concerns about the depth or breadth of these reviews.

Personnel

  Julien Laganier (julienl@qualcomm.com) is the document
  shepherd.  Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> is the
  responsible AD.

RFC Editor Note