Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions (RFC3025)
Original Publication Date: 2001-Feb-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2001-Aug-17
Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)
G. Dommety: AUTHOR [+2]
AbstractThis document defines two new extensions to Mobile IP. These extensions will facilitate equipment vendors and organizations to make specific use of these extensions as they see fit for research or deployment purposes.
Network Working Group G. Dommety Request for Comments: 3025 K. Leung Category: Standards Track cisco Systems
Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
This document defines two new extensions to Mobile IP. These extensions will facilitate equipment vendors and organizations to make specific use of these extensions as they see fit for research or deployment purposes.
Current specification of Mobile IP  does not allow for organizations and vendors to include organization/vendor-specific information in the Mobile IP messages. With the imminent wide scale deployment of Mobile IP it is useful to have vendor or organization- Specific Extensions to support this capability. This document defines two extensions that can be used for making organization specific extensions by vendors/organizations for their own specific purposes.
1.1. Specification Language
The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 .
In addition, the following words are used to signify the requirements of the specification.
Dommety Leung Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 3025 Mobile IP Vendor Specific Extensions February 2001
silently discard The implementation discards the datagram without further processing, and without indicating an error to the sender. The implementation SHOULD provide the capability of logging the error, including the contents of the discarded datagram, and SHOULD record the event in a statistics counter.
2. Vendor/Organization Specific Extensions
Two Vendor/Organization Specific Extensions are described, Critical (CVSE) and Normal (NVSE) Vendor/Organization Specific Extensions. The basic differences between the Critical and Normal Extensions are that when the Critical extension is encountered but not recognized, the message containing the extension MUST be silently discarded, whereas when a Normal Vendor/Organization Specific Extension is encountered but not recognized, the extension SHOULD be ignored, but the rest of the Extensions and message data MUST still be processed. Another difference between the two is that Critical Vendor/Organization Extension has a length field of two octets and the NVSE has a length field of only one octet.
2.1. Critical Vendor/Organization Specific Extension (CVSE)
The format of this extension is as shown below.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 Type Reserved Length Vendor/Org-ID Vendor-CVSE-Type Ve...