Skip to main content

Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6
RFC 4068

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
03 (System) Notify list changed from gab@sun.com, Rajeev.Koodli@nokia.com to gab@sun.com
2012-08-22
03 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Russ Housley
2005-11-07
(System) Posted related IPR disclosure: DoCoMo USA Labs' Statement about IPR claimed in  rfc-4068.txt
2005-07-14
03 Amy Vezza [Note]: 'RFC 4068' added by Amy Vezza
2005-07-14
03 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza
2005-07-08
03 (System) RFC published
2004-10-27
03 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2004-10-26
03 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2004-10-26
03 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2004-10-26
03 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2004-10-26
03 Thomas Narten State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Thomas Narten
2004-10-26
03 Thomas Narten Note field has been cleared by Thomas Narten
2004-10-22
03 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] Position for Russ Housley has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Russ Housley
2004-10-22
03 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2004-10-22
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-mipshop-fast-mipv6-03.txt
2004-10-07
03 Thomas Narten [Note]: '2004-09-23: IESG comments being discussed in the WG.' added by Thomas Narten
2004-09-17
03 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2004-09-16
2004-09-16
03 Amy Vezza State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza
2004-09-16
03 Allison Mankin
[Ballot comment]
I've reviewed the use of the Experimental ICMPv6 format wrt to the other users, CARD and
CTP.  I'm not sure IANA can start …
[Ballot comment]
I've reviewed the use of the Experimental ICMPv6 format wrt to the other users, CARD and
CTP.  I'm not sure IANA can start assignment with 0, so the requested values may be
incorrect.

The discussion of the benefits from fast handoff is compelling - should the draft include text
describing the terms of experiment:  how the protocol will be evaluated and developed towards becoming standards track?  or is this in the working group's charter?
2004-09-16
03 Bert Wijnen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen by Bert Wijnen
2004-09-16
03 Allison Mankin
[Ballot comment]
I've reviewed the use of the Experimental ICMPv6 format wrt to the other users, CARD and
CTP.  I'm not sure IANA can start …
[Ballot comment]
I've reviewed the use of the Experimental ICMPv6 format wrt to the other users, CARD and
CTP.  I'm not sure IANA can start assignment with 0, so the requested values may be
incorrect.
2004-09-16
03 Allison Mankin [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Allison Mankin by Allison Mankin
2004-09-16
03 Harald Alvestrand
[Ballot comment]
Reviewed by John Loughney, Gen-ART

His review:

Conflict of interest warning, the author of this draft is from the same
lab here at …
[Ballot comment]
Reviewed by John Loughney, Gen-ART

His review:

Conflict of interest warning, the author of this draft is from the same
lab here at NRC as I am in.

Sumary: this is an experimental protocol from the MIPSHOP working group.
I think that the protocol is reasonable explained and IANA Considerations
& Security sections are covered in a reasonable manner for an experimental
document, so this should be approved.  A few nits were found.

Nits:

1) `` and '' characters should be replaced with "
2) Double blank line spacing throughout document.
3) MN abbreviation used before it is defined (section 19.
4) ``IP connectivity'' latency is used as a term, defining
  this might be a good idea.
5) IP-capable is used as a term, defining this might be a good idea.
6) Disclaimer of validity, Full Copyright Statement, etc. shouldn't be
  listed as appendicies.
7) Full Copyright Statement says: Copyright (C) The Internet Society (year). 
  probably want to fill the (year) part with 2004.
2004-09-16
03 Harald Alvestrand [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Harald Alvestrand by Harald Alvestrand
2004-09-16
03 Alex Zinin [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alex Zinin by Alex Zinin
2004-09-15
03 Bill Fenner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner
2004-09-15
03 David Kessens [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens
2004-09-15
03 Margaret Cullen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman by Margaret Wasserman
2004-09-14
03 Russ Housley
[Ballot comment]
The Security Considerations say:
  :
  : ... However, the future work, either as part of this document or in a
  …
[Ballot comment]
The Security Considerations say:
  :
  : ... However, the future work, either as part of this document or in a
  : separate document, may specify this security establishment.
  :
  Obviously, future work cannot be part of this document.  A subsequent
  update to this document is possible.  Also, please change "security
  establishment" to "security association establishment."
2004-09-14
03 Russ Housley [Ballot discuss]
Several places, the document refers to AH in SHOULD and MUST statements,
  yet there is no corresponding normative reference.
2004-09-14
03 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley
2004-09-13
03 Steven Bellovin
[Ballot comment]
For an Experimental RFC, the security discussion is adequate.  It is *not* adequate for a standards track document.  The suggested work on security …
[Ballot comment]
For an Experimental RFC, the security discussion is adequate.  It is *not* adequate for a standards track document.  The suggested work on security MUST take place.  I caution the authors that many of the AH security associations mentioned in the text are going to be very hard to set up, since the mobile node may have no a priori way to determine the authorized Access Routers.
2004-09-13
03 Steven Bellovin [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Steve Bellovin by Steve Bellovin
2004-09-10
03 Scott Hollenbeck [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck by Scott Hollenbeck
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Thomas Narten
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten Ballot has been issued by Thomas Narten
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten Created "Approve" ballot
2004-09-08
03 (System) Last call text was added
2004-09-08
03 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten Placed on agenda for telechat - 2004-09-16 by Thomas Narten
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten State Changes to IESG Evaluation from AD Evaluation by Thomas Narten
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Thomas Narten
2004-09-08
03 Thomas Narten State Change Notice email list have been change to gab@sun.com, Rajeev.Koodli@nokia.com from
2004-07-15
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-mipshop-fast-mipv6-02.txt
2004-02-12
03 Dinara Suleymanova Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova
2004-02-05
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-mipshop-fast-mipv6-01.txt
2003-10-22
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-mipshop-fast-mipv6-00.txt