Re: [DNA-BOF] Attachment Detection charter text for discussion

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@kolumbus.fi>]

Brett Pentland wrote:

> All good points.  So how do we fit this in to the DNA picture?  Though
> I've said that I think that "Network Attachment" occurs as soon as
> IP datagrams can be sent and received, I think that "Detecting Network
> Attachment" may involve some packet exchange after that time (eg. RS/RA,
> NUD-like probes, etc.) to work out what has been attached to.
> 
> Could working out the authorization state fit into that "post-attachment
> discovery phase" or do we really need a different difinition of
> "attachment"?

I would say "to work out what has been attached to" may be a part of
DNA. But I don't have a strong opinion on that.

Regarding the the post-attachment authorization phase, perhaps one
approach would be to

(1) Keep this primarily a problem of the folks who are doing it, such
     as PANA. They could document the API requirements and implications
     of back-off procedures etc. Or maybe already have done that. Alper?

(2) In addition, as we describe the link state and hints in DNA,
     we'll add some clarifying text about post-attachment state and
     hints. For instance, we could say that IP capability may not imply
     connectivity, and that there may be additional tasks before
     global signaling such as MIPv6 can take place. Name a few examples,
     such as the login webpages, and say that details of these are
     out of scope for DNA.

     The purpose of this clarifying text is to alert the reader to
     the issue, but not solve it in DNA.

(3) If we are going to talk about multihoming case, mention the
     item 2 problem in that context as well. Might want to prefer
     a slow link over fast but webpage-login-not-yet-done link ;-)

--Jari