RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Held for Document Update (2)

RFC 4889, "Network Mobility Route Optimization Solution Space Analysis", July 2007

Source of RFC: nemo (int)

Errata ID: 1038

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-09-12
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman

Section 5.1.2 says:

   Traditionally, it has been generally
   avoided having state information in the routers to increase
   proportionally with the number of pairs of communicating peers.

It should say:

[see below]

Notes:

This is not true for the vast majority of IPv4 routers deployed
today, the typical NAT/NAPT 'SOHO' access routers, which all need to
keep *per flow* state -- increasing even more, proportionally with
the number of transport 'sessions' between communicating peers!

Errata ID: 1037

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-09-12
Held for Document Update by: Brian Haberman

 

(1)  Section titles -- missing articles

The following section titles:

       5.5.1.  Binding to the Location of Parent Mobile Router
and
       5.5.3.  Binding to the Location of Root Mobile Router

apparently lack of tha article after "of", and should therefore
better have been written as:

       5.5.1.  Binding to the Location of the Parent Mobile Router
and
       5.5.3.  Binding to the Location of the Root Mobile Router

or perhaps alternatively, even shorter:

       5.5.1.  Binding to the Parent Mobile Router's Location
and
       5.5.3.  Binding to the Root Mobile Router's Location


(2)  Section 1 -- a typo and sluggish wording

(2a)
The first paragraph of Section 1 says:

   Network Mobility Route Optimization Problem Statement [1] describes
|  operational limitations and overheads incurred in a deployment of
   Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support [2], which could be alleviated
   by a set of NEMO Route Optimization techniques to be defined.

It should perhaps better have used the singular, "overhead",
and stated:

   Network Mobility Route Optimization Problem Statement [1] describes
|  operational limitations and overhead incurred in a deployment of
   Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support [2], which could be alleviated
   by a set of NEMO Route Optimization techniques to be defined.

(2b)
The last paragraph of Section 1 says:

                      [...].  A point to note is that since this
   document discusses aspects of Route Optimization, the reader may
|  assume that a mobile network or a mobile host is away when they are
   mentioned throughout this document, unless it is explicitly specified
   that they are at home.

The sluggish abbreviated pure "away" should better have been avoided,
stating:
                      [...].  A point to note is that since this
   document discusses aspects of Route Optimization, the reader may
|  assume that a mobile network or a mobile host is away from home when
   they are mentioned throughout this document, unless it is explicitly
   specified that they are at home.


(3)  Section 2

As in item (2a) above, in the 4th bullet of Section 2, near the
bottom of page 4,  "overheads"  should perhaps better b replaced by
the singular form, "overhead".


(4)  Section 3.1 -- missing article

The initial paragraph of Section 3.1, on mid-page 6, says:

|                 [...].  With the use of Correspondent Router, Route
   Optimization session is terminated at the Correspondent Router on
   behalf of the Correspondent Node.  As long as the Correspondent
   Router is located "closer" to the Correspondent Node ...

It should better say:
                                                               vvvv
|                 [...].  With the use of Correspondent Router, the
   Route Optimization session is terminated at the Correspondent Router
   on behalf of the Correspondent Node.  As long as the Correspondent
   Router is located "closer" to the Correspondent Node ...


(5)  Section 3.2.1 -- mis-wording

The last paragraph/sentence of Section 3.1.2, at the bottom of
page 8, does not parse.

The RFC says:

   An example of this approach include Reverse Routing Header (RRH)
   [10].

It should perhaps say either:

   An example of this approach can be found in Reverse Routing Header
   (RRH) [10].

or simply:

   Reverse Routing Header (RRH) [10] is an example of this approach.


(6)  Section 3.3 -- typo

The first paragraph of Section 3.3, on mid-page 9, says:

   An infrastructure-based optimization is an approach where
   optimization is carried out fully in the infrastructure.  One example
   is to make use of Mobility Anchor Points (MAPs) such as defined in
   HMIPv6 [13] to optimize routes between themselves.  Another example
|  is to make use of proxy Home Agent such as defined in the global Home
   Agent to Home Agent (HAHA) protocol [14].  A proxy Home Agent acts as
   a Home Agent for the Mobile Node, and acts as a Mobile Node for the
   Home Agent, Correspondent Node, Correspondent Router, and other
   proxies.  In particular, the proxy Home Agent terminates the MRHA
   tunnel and the associated encryption, extracts the packets, and re-
   encapsulates them to the destination.  In this case, proxy Home
   Agents are distributed in the infrastructure and each Mobile Router
   binds to the closest proxy.  [...]

It should use the plural of "Home Agent" in the 5th line,
and thus say:

   An infrastructure-based optimization is an approach where
   optimization is carried out fully in the infrastructure.  One example
   is to make use of Mobility Anchor Points (MAPs) such as defined in
   HMIPv6 [13] to optimize routes between themselves.  Another example
|  is to make use of proxy Home Agents such as defined in the global
   Home Agent to Home Agent (HAHA) protocol [14].  A proxy Home Agent
   acts as a Home Agent for the Mobile Node, and acts as a Mobile Node
   for the Home Agent, Correspondent Node, Correspondent Router, and
   other proxies.  In particular, the proxy Home Agent terminates the
   MRHA tunnel and the associated encryption, extracts the packets, and
   re-encapsulates them to the destination.  In this case, proxy Home
   Agents are distributed in the infrastructure and each Mobile Router
   binds to the closest proxy.  [...]


(7)  Section 4.1 -- singular/plural mismatches

Within Section 4.1, at the bottom of page 1, ...

(7a)
the 2nd paragraph says:

|        [...].  This effect will be especially significant for wireless
|  environment where bandwidth is relatively limited.

where it should say:
                                                               vv
|        [...].  This effect will be especially significant for a
   wireless environment where bandwidth is relatively limited.

or:

         [...].  This effect will be especially significant for wireless
|  environments where bandwidth is relatively limited.
              ^
and ...

(7b)
the 3rd paragraph says:

|  It is possible to moderate the effect of Signaling Storm by
   incorporating mechanisms such as [...]

where it should say:
                                            vv
|  It is possible to moderate the effect of a Signaling Storm by
   incorporating mechanisms such as [...]

or:
                                                           v
|  It is possible to moderate the effect of Signaling Storms by
   incorporating mechanisms such as [...]

(Please choose!)


(8)  Section 4.2 -- missing article and singular/plural mismatch

The 1st paragraph of Section 4.2, on page 12, says:

                                  v
   It is expected that NEMO Route Optimization will be more complicated
|  than NEMO Basic Support.  Thus, complexity of nodes that are required
   to incorporate new functionalities to support NEMO Route Optimization
|  would be higher than those required to provide NEMO Basic Support.
                        ^^^^^
It should say:
                                  vvvvv
   It is expected that NEMO Route Optimization will be more complicated
|  than NEMO Basic Support.  Thus, the complexity of nodes that are
   required to incorporate new functionalities to support NEMO Route
|  Optimization would be higher than that required to provide NEMO
   Basic Support.
                                     ^^^^

(9)  Section 4.3 -- missing articles

The 1st paragraph of Section 4.3, on mid-page 12, says:
                                                            v
|  Due to the diversity of locations of different nodes that Mobile
                                                     v
|  Network Node may signal with and the complexity of NEMO Route
   Optimization procedure that may cause several rounds of signaling
   messages, a NEMO Route Optimization procedure may take a longer time
   to finish its handoff than that in NEMO Basic Support.  [...]

It should say:
                                                            vvv
|  Due to the diversity of locations of different nodes that a Mobile
                                                     vvv
|  Network Node may signal with and the complexity of a NEMO Route
   Optimization procedure that may cause several rounds of signaling
   messages, a NEMO Route Optimization procedure may take a longer time
   to finish its handoff than that in NEMO Basic Support.  [...]


(10)  Section 4.4 -- missing article

The first paragraph of Section 4.4, on top of page 13, says:

                         v
   In order to support NEMO Route Optimization, some nodes need to be
|  changed or upgraded.  Smaller number of nodes required to be changed
   will allow for easier adoption of the NEMO Route Optimization
   solution in the Internet and create less impact on existing Internet
   infrastructure.  [...]

It should say:
                         vvv
   In order to support NEMO Route Optimization, some nodes need to be
|  changed or upgraded.  A smaller number of nodes required to be
   changed will allow for easier adoption of the NEMO Route Optimization
   solution in the Internet and create less impact on existing Internet
   infrastructure.  [...]


(11)  Section 4.6

In the first paragraph of Section 4.6, in place of:

   ... keep track of the states of all Route Optimization sessions.
                              ^
the RFC should preferably say:

   ... keep track of the state of all Route Optimization sessions.


(12)  Section 5

The list item:

   3.  How is Route Optimization capabilities detected?

should better say:

   3.  How are Route Optimization capabilities detected?
or:
   3.  How is Route Optimization capability detected?

... depending on whether you expect a variety or finer granularity of
Route Optimization capabilities vs. a single 'block' of procedures.
Many parts of the memo make it likely that there might be various
solutions for various senarios, and hence the former expectation
be more appropriate.


(13)  [[posted separately as Technical.]]


(14)  Section 5.1.3

The 3rd paragraph of Section 5.1.3, on top of page 18, says:

   A deployment consideration with respect to the use of Correspondent
|  Router is the location of the Correspondent Router relative to the
   Correspondent Node.  [...]

It should say:
         v
   A deployment consideration with respect to the use of Correspondent
|  Routers is the location of the Correspondent Router relative to the
   Correspondent Node.  [...]


(15)  Section 5.2

The first paragraphh of Section 5.2 (still on page 18) says:

                                                       [...].  However,
   when the mobile node is within a nested mobile network, the detection
   of the mobility of upstream Mobile Routers may need to be conveyed to
|  the nested Mobile Network Node.  This might incur longer signaling
   delay as discussed in Section 4.3.

It should say:
                                                       [...].  However,
   when the mobile node is within a nested mobile network, the detection
   of the mobility of upstream Mobile Routers may need to be conveyed to
|  the nested Mobile Network Node.  This might incur a longer signaling
   delay as discussed in Section 4.3.
                                                     ^^

(16)  Section 5.3 -- grammar

The first paragraphh of Section 5.3, on mid-page 19, says:

   The question here is how the initiator of Route Optimization knows
   whether the Correspondent Entity supports the functionality required
|  to established a Route Optimization session.  [...]
               ^^^

This sentence does not parse.
It should say:

   The question here is how the initiator of Route Optimization knows
   whether the Correspondent Entity supports the functionality required
|  to establish a Route Optimization session.  [...]
               ^

(17)  Section 5.5

The first paragraphh of Section 5.5, near the bottom of page 20, says:
               v
|  In order for route to be optimized, it is generally necessary for the
   Correspondent Entity to create a binding between the address and the
   location of the Mobile Network Node.  This can be done in the
   following ways:

It should say:
               vvv
|  In order for a route to be optimized, it is generally necessary for
   the Correspondent Entity to create a binding between the address and
   the location of the Mobile Network Node.  This can be done in the
   following ways:


(18)  Section 5.5.1

(18a) section headline -- see item (1) above

(18b) headline of second bullet on page 21

The RFC says:

|  o  Sending Information of Parent Mobile Router
                            ^
It should say:

|  o  Sending Information of the Parent Mobile Router
                            ^^^^^
This issue recurs several times in the text;
I omit to mention these details.

(18c)
At the bottom of page 22, the RFC says:

   One advantage shared by all the approaches listed here is that only
   mobility protocol is affected.  [...]

It should say:

   One advantage shared by all the approaches listed here is that only
|  the mobility protocol is affected.  [...]
   ^^^^


(19)  Section 5.5.3

(19a) section headline -- see item (1) above

(19b)
The third paragraph of the first bullet of Section 5.5.3, just below
the page break to page 25, says:

                              [...].  However, it requires the access
<< page break >>
|     router (or some other entity within the access network) and Mobile
|     Router to possess prefix delegation functionality, and also
      maintain information on what prefix is delegated to which node.
|     How to efficiently assign a subset of Mobile Network Prefix to
      child Mobile Routers could be an issue because Mobile Network
      Nodes may dynamically join and leave with an unpredictable
      pattern.  [...]

It should say:
                              [...].  However, it requires the access
<< page break >>                                                 vvvv
|     router (or some other entity within the access network) and the
      Mobile Router to possess prefix delegation functionality, and also
|     to maintain information on what prefix is delegated to which node.
      ^^^                                   vvvv
|     How to efficiently assign a subset of the Mobile Network Prefix to
      child Mobile Routers could be an issue because Mobile Network
      Nodes may dynamically join and leave with an unpredictable
      pattern.  [...]

(Alternatively, use "a" in place of the inserted "the".)


(20)  Section 5.6

The 2nd paragraph of Section 5.6, on topof page 27, says:

          [...].  Off-plane signaling, on the other hand, sends
|  signaling messages independently from the data packet.  [...]
                                                       ^^
It should say:

          [...].  Off-plane signaling, on the other hand, sends
|  signaling messages independently from the data packets.  [...]
                                                       ^^^

(21)  Section 5.8.1

The last paragraph of Section 5.8.1, on page 30, says:

                                                [...].  There is also a
|  proposed mechanism in [23] for Mobile Network Node to delegate some
   rights to their Mobile Routers, which may be used to allow the Mobile
   Routers to prove their authenticities to Correspondent Entities when
   establishing Route Optimization sessions on behalf of the Mobile
   Network Nodes.

It should say:
a                                                    v
                                                [...].  There is also a
|  proposed mechanism in [23] for Mobile Network Nodes to delegate some
   rights to their Mobile Routers, which may be used to allow the Mobile
   Routers to prove their authenticities to Correspondent Entities when
   establishing Route Optimization sessions on behalf of the Mobile
   Network Nodes.

Report New Errata



Search RFCs
Advanced Search
×