NEMO Basic Support Protocol NEMO Design Team Vijay Devarapalli (NOKIA) Ryuji Wakikawa (Keio/WIDE) Alexandru Petrescu (Motorola) Pascal Thubert (Cisco Systems) IETF 57th NEMO WG
NEMO Basic Support draft is out • Design Team was formed after the IETF SF • Initial draft – draft-ietf-nemo-basic-support-00.txt • Issue list – http://people.nokia.net/vijayd/nemo/issues.html • Comments should be posted to – nemo ML (nemo@ietf.org) IETF 57th NEMO WG
NEMO Basic Support Protocol CN Internet Internet HA l e n n u T l a n o Binding Cache i t c e r i d - i B MR HoA – MR CoA MR IP-in-IP Encapsulation MNP – MR HoA MNN IETF 57th NEMO WG
Explicit and Implicit Signaling Explicit Binding Update Implicit Binding Update Mobile Network Prefix Option IP header HoA IPsec BU (R) IP header HoA IPsec BU (R) MNP/len Mobile Network Prefix Length Option IP header HoA IPsec BU (R) Pfx-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 IETF 57th NEMO WG
Issues Status • 6 issues raised (4 accepted, 1 open, 1 rejected) – http://people.nokia.net/vijayd/nemo/issues.html • Issue 6 – How does HA distinguish between implicit mode and dynamic routing protocol – An explicit flag in the binding update • Resolution – No Flag, because it is a matter of configuration on the Home Agent – Do we need to check consistency of prefixes between routing protocol and BU signaling • Issue 3 – Should HA forward packets for the MNNs to the MR if the ‘R’ flag was set to 0 • Resolution – No. If R flag was set to 0, the MR wants to to be considered as a mobile host. HA MUST NOT forward – Should HA store prefix information in the binding cache entry • Resolution – Yes. In explicit case, useful for deleting the prefix routes when the binding cache entry is deleted IETF 57th NEMO WG
Extended Home Network (issue 5) Home HA Network Classical Home Address a:b:c:1::/64 Extended Home Network HoA a:b:c:1::EUI64 MRn MNP2 MNP a:b:c:n::/64 MR2 a:b:c:2::/64 Extended Home Address MNP3 MR3 a:b:c:3::/64 HoA a:b:c:n::Xi MRn MNP a:b:c:n::/64 MNP4 MR4 a:b:c::/48 a:b:c:4::/64 IETF 57th NEMO WG
Returning extended home network Proxy Model Rocket Model a:b:c:n:/64 a:b:c::/48 a:b:c::/48 proxy HA MR HA MR Ingress IF Egress IF MR Egress IF Ingress IF IETF 57th NEMO WG
For example, it is expected that: • There is a single Home Network and multiple Mobile Networks • The Home Network and Mobile Network prefixes are tailored to allow for IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration with typical interface identifier length for the type of interface • The prefix length of the extended Home Network is shorter than the Home Network and the Mobile Network prefixes, since it is an aggregation • The Home Agents collectively advertise the extended Home Network aggregation only. The dichotomy of the extended Home Network is kept within the Home Agents and the Mobile Nodes, as opposed to advertised by means of routing protocols to other parties IETF 57th NEMO WG
This specification does not prevent that • More than one Mobile Network may be connected to a Mobile Router • A Mobile Network Prefix may be shared between Mobile Routers and registered by some of them • An Mobile Network Prefix may be registered several times to several Home Agents using different (extended) Home Addresses for each registration IETF 57th NEMO WG
This draft is open to • Mobile Router autoconfiguring one or several extended Home Address to carry out many registrations in parallel. It owns the full prefix so it may use any address in there for a MNLP based registration, and several of them for multihoming • Mobile Node autoconfiguring one or several Care- of Addresses from the Mobile Network Prefix • Mobile Host autoconfiguring one or several Home Addresses from the Home Network IETF 57th NEMO WG
Fin. A N Y Q U E ST IO N S O R C O M M E N T S? IETF 57th NEMO WG
Recommend
More recommend
