network mobility with proxy mobile ipv6 draft petrescu netext pmip nemo 01 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Network Mobility with Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft - petrescu - netext - pmip - nemo -01 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Network Mobility with Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft - petrescu - netext - pmip - nemo -01

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 10

Network Mobility with Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft - petrescu - netext - pmip - nemo -01 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 154 Views
  • Uploaded on

Network Mobility with Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft - petrescu - netext - pmip - nemo -01. Alexandru Petrescu (speaker) , Michael BOC, and Christophe Janneteau. IETF 84, Vancouver, August 2 nd , 2012. Problem of Network Mobility. Problem of network mobility in a PMIP domain :

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Network Mobility with Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft - petrescu - netext - pmip - nemo -01' - tehya


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
network mobility with proxy mobile ipv6 draft petrescu netext pmip nemo 01

Network Mobilitywith Proxy Mobile IPv6draft-petrescu-netext-pmip-nemo-01

Alexandru Petrescu (speaker),

Michael BOC,

and Christophe Janneteau

IETF 84, Vancouver, August 2nd, 2012

problem of network mobility
Problem of Network Mobility
  • Problem of network mobility in a PMIP domain:
    • PMIP allocates a /64 prefix HNP to a Mobile Host
    • HNP topologicalcorrectnessonly on MH-MAG iface
    • HNP connected route on MAG
    • LFNsneedaddresses
    • MAG wouldneed a classical non-connected route for parts of HNP, towards MH interface
  • Needallocation of a MNP (MovingNetwork Prefix) to a MR
pmip network mobility problem
PMIP Network Mobilityproblem

Towards Internet

Towards Internet

PMIP Fixed

Infrastructure

LMA

LMA

MAG1

MAG2

MAG1

MAG2

Routing Table

[HNP, LLMH@]

Routing Table

[HNP, LLMR@]

[MNP, LLMR@]

(handover)

Moving Network

A1; LLMH@

Routing Table

[A1, egress]

[MNP, ingress]

A1;

LLMR@

Routing Table

[HNP, egress]

[A1, egress]

MH

(handover)

MR

MNP needed!

A6

LFN1

LFN1

A3

A5

PMIP HNP,with MH

Need MNP for LFNs

design considerations of delegating a prefix in a pmip context
Design Considerations of Delegating a Prefixin a PMIP context
  • Should MNP beallocated by whom?
    • DHCP?
    • PMIP?
    • Derivedfrom HNP?
  • Should LMA allocate a prefix?
    • or shoulditaccept a prefixallocated by DHCP?
  • Shouldhave support for shared links?
    • or for ptp links?
  • Should LMA beco-localizedwith a DHCP Server?
    • or shoulditbeseparated?
  • « Proxy »
    • should use proxy NeighborDiscovery on MR?
    • should use proxy DHCP on MR? On MAG? On LMA?
    • or shouldavoid use of proxiesand bridges?
  • How to auto-configure LFNs out of MNP?
    • will /65 workwith SLAAC and LFNs?
pmipv6 nemo with dhcpv6 pd 1 2
PMIPv6-NEMO with DHCPv6-PD (1/2)
  • Extension of I-D PD-PMIP?
  • What’sdifferent?
    • Prefixdelegationensured by DHCPv6-PD (vs. ensured by LMA)
      • Hintssupported
      • Multiple PDs in requestsupported (vs. only a single one, PBU MNP=0)
    • Mobilitymgmtof delegatedprefixesensured by PMIPv6
      • Prefixes are imposed by DR to LMA (vs. imposed by LMA to DR)
    • DHCP DelgRtrcanbeseparatedfrom LMA (vs. DR MUST beco-locatedwith LMA)
    • MAG changes DHCPv6’s DUID to PMIPv6’s MNID
      • MNID is a common identifier between PMIP and DHCP databases (vs. no linkbetwenDR and LMA’sdatabases)
    • Bit Q (vs. Bit R)
    • Lifetime management isnecessary (vs. permanent)
pmipv6 nemo with dhcpv6 pd 2 2
PMIPv6-NEMO with DHCPv6-PD (2/2)

MR

(Requ.Router)

DHCPv6 Relay

MAG

DHCPv6 Server

(Delegating Router)

LFN

LMA

CN

MR isregisteredat LMA (PMIPv6 normal procedure) and has HNP(s)

Delegating router

may not beco-located

with LMA

RA(MR=Default router)

DHCP Request (DUID,MNP/X)

DHCP Relay-forward

(DUID=MNID, MNP/X)

Provided IA PD hint

maybeconsidered

DHCP relay-reply

(MNID,MNP/Y)

PBU (MNID, MNP/Y)

DUID ischanged

to PMIPv6’s MNID

PBA (MNID, MNP/Y)

DHCP Reply

(DUID,MNP/Y)

RA(MNP/64) or

DHCPv6(MNP/128)

Data using

HNP & MNP

Tunnel IPv6-in-IPv6

PMIPv6’s MNID is

changed back to DUID

pmip network mobility hnp division
PMIP Network Mobility, HNP Division
  • Couldbe an extension to PMIP:
    • PBU tells LMA that a MNP isout of HNP
  • Self-form MNP out of HNP (alternative to use DHCP-PD )
  • Offer network mobility, without modification of PMIP messages
  • Works on ptp links, not on shared links
slide8

A011000

Example HNP division withhypothetical

5bit addresses

  • HNP/2  A/5, MNP1/4

and MNP2/3

  • HNP/64  A/128, MNP1/66 and MNP2/65.

A211010

To beused by LFNs

A311011

MNP1 /4

HNP Division

A11000

A1 11001

To beused by MR’segress

HNP /2

A411100

A511101

To beused by LFNs

A611110

A711111

MNP2 /3

slide9

SimilarPrefix Division concepts alluded to in:

    • draft-krishnan-intarea-pd-epc-00, « PrefixDelegation in EPC Networks », 2010.
    • draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment-01, « PrefixAssignment in a Home Network », 2011.
  • There isimplementation of PMIP-NEMO
slide10

Questions to the group:

    • Is HNP Division an attractive way of creating MNP
    • Is separation of DHCP Server from LMA good for deployments