(usagi-users 02894) Re: USAGI MIPL problems

[ognjen dobrijenic <ognjen_d@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Dave,
 first of all, thank you for your quick response...

This concerning recognition of BU/BA, I had previously
installed HUT's MIPL 0.9.5.1 and 1.0 and the version
of Ethereal that I have been using from the start was
always capable of recognizing BAs/BUs. Do you think
perhaps I should degrade my Ethereal to some of the
previous versions? I don't think so, because MIPL's
0.9.5(.1) is integrated in USAGI so I assume that
Mobility Header's definition is the same.

About this second thing, your assumption is completely
accurate. I had totally forgotten to mention this in
my previous message. The thing is, after boot my MN's
interface really has 2 addresses, one that gets from
ifcfg-eth1 script and another that is defined after
MIP6 script starts. This latter one is a care-of
address (assigned to the interface during boot) made
with the home-link prefix. It has confused me a bit,
because I didn't encounter it before and I obviously
don't need it. What about this care-of address, do you
perhaps know how to turn off this stateless
autoconfiguration during boot?
 
    Best regards,
                  Ognjen     
    
--- "Craig, Dave" <dwcraig@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I also encountered problems recognizing BA/BU
> packets when using an
> older version of Ethereal.  Upgrading to the latest
> version of Ethereal
> has the latest definition for Mobility Header (135).
> 
> I have not seen the dual binding problem before.  A
> binding is supposed
> to replace the previous binding.  If there are two
> Binding Updates sent,
> the HA would only store one binding.  Do you have
> two addresses
> configured?
> 
> 	Dave

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/