Mobile Ad-hoc Network WIDE project/KEIO University - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mobile Ad-hoc Network WIDE project/KEIO University ryuji@sfc.wide.ad.jp

ToC � Global Internet Connectivity � MANET/NEMO integration � IPv6 Support on MANET

MANET on the Internet Where can MANET be deployed in our daily life? � Internet consists on the hierarchical routing. All mobility protocols � face to redundant routes due to the hierarchical routing (i.e. dog-leg, triangle routing). MANET can bypass the hierarchical routing structure dynamically Problem Statements � Lack of Mobility Support for Mobile Ad-hoc Network. � Lack of Route Optimization � Lack of MANET Scalability. � Ad-hoc routes are very effective to reach to the Internet. ex. When a � vehicle enter a tunnel, it connects an AR at the outside tunnel by Internet Internet MANET

Global Internet Connectivity � Internet access capability makes MANET more powerful and useful � “MANET = leaf network” connects to the Internet � MIP6 and NEMO can operate in MANET via Internet Gateway � draft-wakikawa-manet-globalv6-03.txt

Internet Gateway (IGW) • Internet Gateway Discovery • Globally Routable IPv6 �������� address Assignment • Route Setup • Route Discovery ��� • Route Examination • Mobile IPv6/NEMO Support ������������� ������������� � ����������� … � � ��������������

MANET meets MIP/NEMO

NEMO Basic Support Protocol CN Internet Internet HA Bi-directional Tunnel Binding Cache MR HoA – MR CoA MR IP-in-IP Encapsulation MNP – MR HoA MNN

Signaling Explicit Binding Update Implicit Binding Update IP header HoA IPsec BU (R) IP header HoA IPsec BU (R) MNP/len 2. Binding Acknowledgement Prefix Table MR HoA - MNP HA Internet Internet Binding Cache MR HoA – MR CoA MNP – MR HoA 1. Binding Update MR

MANET/NEMO,MIP integration � MANET is capability to solve MIP/NEMO related issues Better Route � Nested Mobility � � MIP/NEMO address MANET issues Address Assignment � Continuous communication � � Classification MANET: Local Mobility and Shortcut Route � � Route Establishment/Management � Bypassing Routing Hierarchy NEMO: Global Mobility and Movement Transparency � � Permanent Address/Prefix Assignment � Continuous Communication

Redundant Routes Redundant route is caused by � bi-directional tunnel overhead between MN/MR and Home Agent � Hierarchy Routing causes redundant route length � How to bypass Hierarchical routing? � Try to establish routes between end-nodes by MANET � eliminates tunnel overhead and redundant route path � Home Agent Home Agent Home Agent Home Agent

Running MANET at interface?! INTERNET (WAN) egress interface MR ingress interface Mobile Network (LAN) Run manet at egress interface � Leaking routes to the Internet is not permitted, MR MR � but the routing domain must be small MR Run manet at any interface (egress or ingress) � MR MR

Nested Mobility!? Bypassing bi-directional tunnel by utilizing manet routes � MANET is designed for mobile nodes � Home Agents Access router(s) Access router(s) root-MR1 root-MR2 root-MR1 root-MR2 sub-MR1 sub-MR3 sub-MR1 sub-MR3 sub-MR2 sub-MR4 sub-MR2 sub-MR4 VMN1 VMN2 VMN1 VMN2

Mobile Gateway (MG) Mobile Gateway � Supporting NEMO Basic Support � Supporting Internet Gateway � Overlay manet network to connect mobile networks � Mobile Network is treated as a MANET cluster � Each Cluster is connected by Mobile Gateway � Not necessary to run MANET by nodes inside each cluster � Internet Internet Internet Connectivity with NEMO support MG MG Overlay MANET for inter mobile network connectivity MG MG: Mobile Gateway MG Mobile Network

Route Selection HA Internet Internet Internet Internet Internet Internet HA MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG detour route direct route nemo route

Route Selection Route Selection among Three Routes: direct route, nemo route, detour � route according to network environment and flow characteristic. Mobile Gateway can change the route during communication without any interruption, because of mobility support direct route is used when two end-nodes communicate over manet routes � on the MG overlay network direct route is managed by each MG at overlay MANET � nemo route is used when two end-nodes communicates over the Internet � with mobility support nemo route is managed by each MG with the basic NEMO � detour route is used when a MG looses its Internet connectivity and borrow � adjacent MG's or Internet Gateway's Internet connectivity detour route is discovered by each MG at overlay MANET. �

IPv6 Ready?!

Why IPv6 Support � Experimental RFC � Focus on IPv4 � Ad-hoc network requires many addresses � Personal Area Network � Vehicles � Supporting IPv6 is urgent � Routing messages are changed to IPv6 address length � NDP interaction � Address Assignments � Global Connectivity

Messages Changes � Address fields are changed to store IPv6 address space � Network address fields are changed to store IPv6 prefix address and its length

Address Assignments � IPv6 has 3 different scope for IPv6 addresses global scope � � optional, only nodes who needs global connectivity link-local scope � � mandate, to all IPv6 nodes site-local scope (deprecated) � � IPv6 allows to assign multiple addresses on an interface ex. link local address x 1, global address x 2 � � Which IPv6 address is used for limited Broadcast address � main address �

Limited Broadcast Address � Limited broadcast address on IPv6 is � all-node multicast address (ff02::1) � All IPv6 nodes joins to ff02::1 the link � Link local address can not be used to transmit packets over multi-hop. Routers can not forward packets sent to/from link-local address. � MANET simply uses ff02::1 as the limited broadcast address � source address: olsr node’s link local address � destination address: ff02::1

Main address � main address is used to create routes for a node � 4 options � link-local scope address as a main address � global scope address as a main address � Any scope address as a main address (ignore scope) � manet address

Link-local as main address � all nodes have link-local scope address � Even when a node-A gets a route (more than one hop away) for a node-B. it can not route packets with the route packets meant for a Link Local scope address can not be routed � on intermediate nodes Node D may route NS for NodeA using the route � � NDP relies on link-local scope � NDP is stateful complicated protocol Receiving NA A B C D sending NS

Global as main address � All nodes do not have a global address � Two different global addresses � Home Address which is not topologically correct address � Global address which is assigned by AR and is topologically correct address � OLSR node needs to get a global address to exchange routing messages � Need route to get a global address from a Gateway

Any scope as main address � same issues when link-local scope is used as a main address

Manet address as main address New address block for manet � new manet scope � new manet address block from global scope (ex. 2001:x:/16) � Concept of manet address � all nodes have a manet address generated by similar approach of LL � address The manet address is only valid within manet � This address’s packet MUST NOT be leaked to the Internet � Each node exchanges routing messages using the manet address and � creates routes for manet nodes using the manet address. The manet address can be used communication within manet, but it is � better to use global scope address if available All manet node multicast address may be defined if necessary �

Address Assignment for MANET � Link local address is an interface address of each MANET node and is used to exchange MANET messages (src/dst address of IP header) � Manet address is a main address of each MANET node Scope Validity Protocol Communicati on Link Local on-link NDP on-link MANET routing Manet within on-link, within protocol MANET manet address Global Internet (Global6) Any

Next Step � IPv6 MANET as a part of the Internet infrastructure � How to accommodate MANET on the current Internet. � Optimization is important, but first deployment. For deployment, we need optimization. � Proposed Standard RFC. (Interoperability) � Applications � Security, scalability, quickness, performance, less overhead, hybrid (proactive/reactive) protocol, etc.