Browse Prior Art Database

Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions (RFC3115)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000005302D
Original Publication Date: 2001-Apr-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2001-Aug-21
Document File: 10 page(s) / 16K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

G. Dommety: AUTHOR [+2]

Abstract

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.

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 21% of the total text.

Network Working Group G. Dommety Request for Comments: 3115 K. Leung Obsoletes: 3025 cisco Systems Category: Standards Track April 2001

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 Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.

RFC Editor Note:

This memo corrects discrepancies between the values assigned for CVSE-TYPE-NUMBER and NVSE-TYPE-NUMBER in RFC 3025 and in the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority's (IANA) repository. The difference in the assigned values are as follows:

CVSE-TYPE-NUMBER 37 in RFC 3025 CVSE-TYPE-NUMBER 38 in IANA (Under Mobile IP numbers)

NVSE-TYPE-NUMBER 133 in RFC 3025 NVSE-TYPE-NUMBER 134 in IANA (Under Mobile IP numbers)

This memo obsoletes RFC 3025, since the current implementations follow the IANA assignments.

Abstract

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.

Dommety Leung Standards Track [Page 1]

RFC 3115 Mobile IP Vendor Specific Extensions April 2001

1. Introduction

Current specification of Mobile IP [1] 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 [3].

In addition, the following words are used to signify the requirements of the specification.

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 ...