Skip to main content

Prefix Delegation Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:


From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Cc: RFC Editor <>,
    netext mailing list <>,
    netext chair <>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Prefix Delegation Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-14.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Prefix Delegation Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6'
  (draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-14.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Network-Based Mobility Extensions
Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Brian Haberman and Ted Lemon.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Ballot Text

Technical Summary:

   This specification defines extensions to Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol
   for allowing a mobile router in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain to obtain
   delegated IP prefixes for its attached mobile networks.  The mobility
   entities in the network will provide network-based mobility
   management support for those delegated IP prefixes just as how IP
   mobility support is provided for the mobile node's home address.
   Even as the mobile router performs a handoff and changes its network
   point of attachment, mobility support is ensured for all the
   delegated IP prefixes and for all the IP nodes in the mobile network
   that use IP address configuration from those delegated IP prefixes.

Working Group Summary:

  The working group has discussed this I-D at length. Comments by
  Alexandru Petrescu
  claimed that the proposal was similar to work being done in other
  working groups. However the working group members believe that this
  extension is essential for Proxy Mobile IPv6 and hence needs to be
  published on its own.

Document Quality:

  The document has been reviewed extensively and revised as a result
  of these reviews. The quality of the document at this time is good
  and ready for IESG review.
  No known implementations of this extension to the Proxy Mobile IPv6
  protocol exist. However a few vendors have expressed plans to
  implement it. 
  All reviewers have been appropriately acknowledged in the I-D. 


  Document Shepherd: Basavaraj Patil
  Responsible AD:    Brian Haberman

RFC Editor Note