IP layer mobility operation and beyond Keiichi Shima Internet Initiative Japan / NAIST The Second Asia Future Internet School PROJECT
Topics global operation beyond the infrastructure-based mobility • Mobile IPv6 experiment toward the • Mobility technology application 2
Mobile IPv6 protocol • Network layer (Layer 3) mobility • On top of IPv6 • Backward compatibility • Less impact to the existing infrastructure • Several extensions, e.g. • Network mobility • Dual-stack support 3
Issues based protocol server (home agent) mobile nodes and their home agents) • Mobile IPv6 is a kind of a tunnel • Single point of failure of the tunnel • Redundant path (due to location of 4
Global operation around the world • Single point of failure • Locate several home agents • Redundant path • Use nearest home agent 5
Global HAHA Concept the global Internet Home site 1 Home network Home site 2 route info Home site 3 Home network Internet route info Mobile Home network terminal route info • The same route information is advertised to • Nearest agents will serve mobility requests
How it works • Forward traffic goes to the nearest HA and forwarded to CN • Reverse traffic goes to the nearest HA (to CN) and tunneled to the HA nearest to MN using the HAHA network MN:HS1 Home site 1 MN:HS1 Home site 2 Home site 3 MN:HS1 Mobile terminal 7
How it works • Home agent at home site 1 notices MN is now moved to home site 3 • Home agent sends a migration message to MN MN:HS1 Home site 1 MN:HS1 Home site 2 Home site 3 MN:HS1 Change HS1 to HS3
How it works • Forward traffic is now terminated by HS3 • Reverse traffic is also forwarded by HS3 MN:HS3 Home site 1 MN:HS3 Home site 2 Home site 3 MN:HS3 9
SHISA infrastructure for BSD operating systems (RFC3946), Multiple CoA Registration, IPv4 traversal [experimental] • IPv6 mobility development/research • Supported RFCs • Mobile IPv6 (RFC3775, 3776), NEMO BS • User space protocol signal processing • Easy to support new protocols • Kernel level packet forwarding • Keep forwarding performance 10
Protocol Verification working code, don’t we? SHISA framework • We believe rough consensus and • Verify the protocol by extending • Using a real testbed 11
Global Operation Implementation Design for SHISA 1. HA to HA tunnels are established before operation using the generic IP tunnel mechanism 2. Binding cache information is copied using a newly defined Mobility Header signal message 3. HA switch message is sent using a newly defined Mobility Header signal message 4. Packet forwarding from HA to HA is implemented using the standard host route mechanism • Only small modification is required 12
Testbed network equipment/service vendors • Interop Tokyo 2008 • One of the biggest exhibition/conference for
Topology advertised from two OSPFv3 different locations by information is Home Internet • 2 home agents network home network HA1 route info • 4 foreign networks Conference Segment ShowNet Server Segment • Home network route backbone MNa CN home MNb network route info Staff Segment HA2 Home network hall 1,2,3 hall 4,5 14
Verification Items HA when booting HA when it moves to the network close to the HA changing HA • Check if a MN registers to the nearest • Check if a MN re-registers to a nearer • Check if performance is improved by 15
16 Network near HA2 Network near HA1 On staff segment (2001:3e8:8::/64) On shownet (2001:3e8:b201:113::/64) On shownet123 (2001:3e8:b114::/64) Home agent switch message detected MN6 MN5 MN4 MN3 MN2 MN1 11th June 2008 12th June 2008 12th June 2008 13th June 2008 13th June 2008 12:00 p.m. 12:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m. 12:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m.
Results booting when it moves check performance difference enhancement • MN could register to the nearest HA when • MN could re-register to nearer HA if necessary • We couldn’t verify performance enhancement • Because the network scale was too small to • We need larger scale testbed to confirm the 17
Other findings HA2 1.Mobile layer need to coordinate with underlaying routing layer possible routes message to two the registration equally forwards Load balancer Message Registration Balancer Load HA1 we do not expect sometimes works as routing network for packet underlying event problem 2.Load balancer must have knowledge of Mobility protocols • Ping-pong registration • We relied on the ShowNet backbone • A load balancer
Beyond the Infrastructure based mobility
Background in urbanized cities disasters, like terrorism in crowded parts of a city structures • Increasing threats of natural disasters • Increasing threats of artificial • High risk to get into collapsed 20
Current Status robots is intensively being researched robot controlled by a human operator • Remote rescue operation using • e.g. http://www.rescuesystem.org • Investigation of disaster areas using a 21
Ex. Crawler Robot crawlers connected by a joint with high degree of freedom obstacles in disaster areas Photo by Matsuno Laboratory at the University of Electro-Communications, Japan • A robot with many • Each crawler is • Can get over 22
Problems controlled by a simple remote control method (e.g. with a wired remote) is limited by the range of the remote area with the robot to control it, that may cause a secondary disaster • Most of the robots are designed to be • The range that the robot can move around • An operator must get into the disaster 23
Assumed Environment stations, underground malls) environment • Inside buildings (e.g. Subway • Large searching area • No communication infrastructure • Unstable communication 24
New Network designed for Rescue Activity wireless IP routers nearest wireless IP router located to extend the network itself • Backbone is consists of multiple • Rescue robots will connect to the • A new wireless router is carried and 25
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Operation Image Target Point Zero 26
Requirements • Automatic network construction • Recovery from network failure • Data type based communication • Scalability 27
Data Type Based Communication • Ad-hoc mesh network properties • Bandwidth changing time to time • Delay jitter • Unstable connectivity 28
Data Types • Data transmitted over the network • Network management data • Robot remote control data • Sensor, image data 29
Data Categories type • Size • Acceptable delay time for each • Importance of data for each type 30
Data Categories Large data size Remote camera Manipulation camera Remote voice Lower delay required Higher delay acceptable Robot control Topology Info Routing Info Heartbeat Sensor Small data size
Selection of Data operable, however the environment • Ideally, all communication should be • Data selection is required based on • Sophisticated robot control • Network support 32
For Practical Networks all the problems technologies • Network technology doesn’t solve • Coordination with robotics • Enhancement of UI technologies 33
Networker’s Approach • As a part of the entire vision • Build APs with lower cost • Higher bandwidth • Manet based routing • Traffic control priority • Network as an application 34
Multihop Wireless (IEEE802.11) and IP • Using cheap wireless technology Ch60 Ch64 Ch36 Ch40 Ch44 Ch48 AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 AP5 AP6 AP7 35
Multihop Wireless (IEEE802.11) and IP • Using cheap wireless technology Ch60 Ch64 Ch36 Ch40 Ch44 Ch48 AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 AP5 AP6 AP7 35
Terrible Results measured by netperf fourth performance of 1 hop case could be achieved 20Mbps • UDP performance 15Mbps 10Mbps • At 6 hops, only one- 5Mbps 0Mbps 1 2 3 4 5 6hops 36
Interference interfere each other even we use different channels • Wireless module • Direction antenna • Different bands 37
Mixture of Bands as possible Wireless Mesh Radio, Multi-Hop Networks” by MSR on each link as much hard to operate 30.0Mbps • Direction antenna is 22.5Mbps • Using different bands 15.0Mbps 7.5Mbps • cf. “Routing in Multi- 0Mbps 1hop 2hops 3hops 38
Overlay Manet depends the implementation design of layer 2 overlay L3 network • Manet protocols sometimes • Implement Manet protocol using 39
Overlay Manet by Sho FUJITA, tun/tap interface Tadashi YASUMOTO be implemented over tun/tap interface, as if they are operated over Ethernet � � � � � � � • Virtual Ethernet using � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � • Manet protocols can � � � � � DYMO SMF Existing middleware APPs • Detailed explanation Operating System (Linux, OSX, *BSD) TUN/TAP IFACE 40
Recommend
More recommend
