Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) Bootstrapping for the Integrated Scenario
RFC 6611

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

(Russ Housley) No Objection

Comment (2008-02-06 for -)
No email
send info
  The security considerations say:
  >
  > No additional security considerations are imposed by the
  > usage of this document.
  >
  The security considerations ought to address any concerns that need
  to be handled by things that are not "imposed" by this document or its
  normative references.  Are there any here?

  The figures seem to have double captions.

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Chris Newman) No Objection

(Tim Polk) (was Discuss, No Record, Discuss) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection

Comment (2008-04-29)
No email
send info
The introduction says:

"In the integrated scenario, the bootstrapping of the home agent  information can be achieved via DHCPv6."

There is no motivation or reasoning why this is a good thing and whether DHCP is really the right mechanism for this problem. Also, it is not clear from the current text whether this is the only proposed mechanism as DHCP is certainly not used everywhere, especially in the mobile scenario and in the case of ipv6 connectivity bootstrapping.

(Mark Townsley) No Objection

(David Ward) No Objection