Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Errata] [Info page]

Obsoleted by:5380 EXPERIMENTAL
Errata Exist
Network Working Group                                         H. SolimanRequest for Comments: 4140                                       FlarionCategory: Experimental                                   C. Castelluccia                                                                   INRIA                                                             K. El Malki                                                                Ericsson                                                              L. Bellier                                                                   INRIA                                                             August 2005Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Mobility Management (HMIPv6)Status of This Memo   This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet   community.  It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.   Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Copyright Notice   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).Abstract   This document introduces extensions to Mobile IPv6 and IPv6 Neighbour   Discovery to allow for local mobility handling.  Hierarchical   mobility management for Mobile IPv6 is designed to reduce the amount   of signalling between the Mobile Node, its Correspondent Nodes, and   its Home Agent.  The Mobility Anchor Point (MAP) described in this   document can also be used to improve the performance of Mobile IPv6   in terms of handover speed.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 1]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005Table of Contents1. Introduction ....................................................32. Terminology .....................................................43. Overview of HMIPv6 ..............................................53.1. HMIPv6 Operation ...........................................64. Mobile IPv6 Extensions ..........................................84.1. Local Binding Update .......................................85. Neighbour Discovery Extension: The MAP Option Message Format ....96. Protocol Operation .............................................106.1. Mobile Node Operation .....................................106.1.1. Sending Packets to Correspondent Nodes .............126.2. MAP Operations ............................................126.3. Home Agent Operations .....................................136.4. Correspondent Node Operations .............................13      6.5. Local Mobility Management Optimisation within a           MAP Domain ................................................136.6. Location Privacy ..........................................147. MAP Discovery ..................................................147.1. Dynamic MAP Discovery .....................................147.1.1. Router Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery .........157.1.2. MAP Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery ............157.2. Mobile Node Operation .....................................168. Updating Previous MAPs .........................................169. Notes on MAP Selection by the Mobile Node ......................179.1. MAP Selection in a Distributed-MAP Environment ............179.2. MAP Selection in a Flat Mobility Management Architecture ..1910. Detection and Recovery from MAP Failures ......................1911. IANA Considerations ...........................................2012. Security Considerations .......................................2012.1. Mobile Node-MAP Security ................................2012.2. Mobile Node-Correspondent Node Security .................2212.3. Mobile Node-Home Agent Security .........................2213. Acknowledgments ...............................................2214. References ....................................................2314.1. Normative References ....................................2314.2. Informative References ..................................23Appendix A: Fast Mobile IPv6 Handovers and HMIPv6 .................24Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 2]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 20051.  Introduction   This memo introduces the concept of a Hierarchical Mobile IPv6   network, utilising a new node called the Mobility Anchor Point (MAP).   Mobile IPv6 [1] allows nodes to move within the Internet topology   while maintaining reachability and on-going connections between   mobile and correspondent nodes.  To do this a mobile node sends   Binding Updates (BUs) to its Home Agent (HA) and all Correspondent   Nodes (CNs) it communicates with, every time it moves.   Authenticating binding updates requires approximately 1.5 round-trip   times between the mobile node and each correspondent node (for the   entire return routability procedure in a best case scenario, i.e., no   packet loss).  In addition, one round-trip time is needed to update   the Home Agent; this can be done simultaneously while updating   correspondent nodes.  The re-use of the home cookie (i.e.,   eliminating HOTI/HOT) will not reduce the number of round trip times   needed to update correspondent nodes.  These round trip delays will   disrupt active connections every time a handoff to a new AR is   performed.  Eliminating this additional delay element from the time-   critical handover period will significantly improve the performance   of Mobile IPv6.  Moreover, in the case of wireless links, such a   solution reduces the number of messages sent over the air interface   to all correspondent nodes and the Home Agent.  A local anchor point   will also allow Mobile IPv6 to benefit from reduced mobility   signalling with external networks.   For these reasons a new Mobile IPv6 node, called the Mobility Anchor   Point, is used and can be located at any level in a hierarchical   network of routers, including the Access Router (AR).  Unlike Foreign   Agents in IPv4, a MAP is not required on each subnet.  The MAP will   limit the amount of Mobile IPv6 signalling outside the local domain.   The introduction of the MAP provides a solution to the issues   outlined earlier in the following way:   - The mobile node sends Binding Updates to the local MAP rather than     the HA (which is typically further away) and CNs   - Only one Binding Update message needs to be transmitted by the MN     before traffic from the HA and all CNs is re-routed to its new     location.  This is independent of the number of CNs that the MN is     communicating with.   A MAP is essentially a local Home Agent.  The aim of introducing the   hierarchical mobility management model in Mobile IPv6 is to enhance   the performance of Mobile IPv6 while minimising the impact on Mobile   IPv6 or other IPv6 protocols.  It also supports Fast Mobile IPv6   Handovers to help Mobile Nodes achieve seamless mobility (seeSoliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 3]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005Appendix A).  Furthermore, HMIPv6 allows mobile nodes to hide their   location from correspondent nodes and Home Agents while using Mobile   IPv6 route optimisation.2.  Terminology   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this   document are to be interpreted as described inRFC 2119 [3].   In addition, new terms are defined below:   Access Router (AR)     The AR is the Mobile Node's default router.                          The AR aggregates the outbound traffic of                          mobile nodes.   Mobility Anchor Point  A Mobility Anchor Point is a router located   (MAP)                  in a network visited by the mobile node.  The                          MAP is used by the MN as a local HA.  One or                          more MAPs can exist within a visited network.   Regional Care-of       An RCoA is an address obtained by the   Address (RCoA)         mobile node from the visited network.  An RCoA                          is an address on the MAP's subnet.  It is                          auto-configured by the mobile node when                          receiving the MAP option.   HMIPv6-aware           An HMIPv6-aware mobile node is a mobile   Mobile Node            node that can receive and process the MAP                          option received from its default router.  An                          HMIPv6-aware Mobile Node must also be able to                          send local binding updates (Binding Update                          with the M flag set).   On-link Care-of        The LCoA is the on-link CoA configured on   Address (LCoA)        a mobile node's interface based on the prefix                          advertised by its default router.  In [1],                          this is simply referred to as the Care-of-                          address.  However, in this memo LCoA is used                          to distinguish it from the RCoA.   Local Binding Update   The MN sends a Local Binding Update to the MAP                          in order to establish a binding between the                          RCoA and LCoA.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 4]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 20053.  Overview of HMIPv6   This Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 scheme introduces a new function, the   MAP, and minor extensions to the mobile node operation.  The   correspondent node and Home Agent operation will not be affected.   Just like Mobile IPv6, this solution is independent of the underlying   access technology, allowing mobility within or between different   types of access networks.   A mobile node entering a MAP domain will receive Router   Advertisements containing information on one or more local MAPs.  The   MN can bind its current location (on-link CoA) with an address on the   MAP's subnet (RCoA).  Acting as a local HA, the MAP will receive all   packets on behalf of the mobile node it is serving and will   encapsulate and forward them directly to the mobile node's current   address.  If the mobile node changes its current address within a   local MAP domain (LCoA), it only needs to register the new address   with the MAP.  Hence, only the Regional CoA (RCoA) needs to be   registered with correspondent nodes and the HA.  The RCoA does not   change as long as the MN moves within a MAP domain (see below for   definition).  This makes the mobile node's mobility transparent to   the correspondent nodes it is communicating with.   A MAP domain's boundaries are defined by the Access Routers (ARs)   advertising the MAP information to the attached Mobile Nodes.  The   detailed extensions to Mobile IPv6 and operations of the different   nodes will be explained later in this document.   It should be noted that the HMIPv6 concept is simply an extension to   the Mobile IPv6 protocol.  An HMIPv6-aware mobile node with an   implementation of Mobile IPv6 SHOULD choose to use the MAP when   discovering such capability in a visited network.  However, in some   cases the mobile node may prefer to simply use the standard Mobile   IPv6 implementation.  For instance, the mobile node may be located in   a visited network within its home site.  In this case, the HA is   located near the visited network and could be used instead of a MAP.   In this scenario, the mobile node would only update the HA whenever   it moves.  The method to determine whether the HA is in the vicinity   of the MN (e.g., same site) is outside the scope of this document.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 5]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 20053.1.  HMIPv6 Operation   The network architecture shown in Figure 1 illustrates an example of   the use of the MAP in a visited network.   In Figure 1, the MAP can help in providing seamless mobility for the   mobile node as it moves from Access Router 1 (AR1) to Access Router 2   (AR2), while communicating with the correspondent node.  A multi-   level hierarchy is not required for a higher handover performance.   Hence, it is sufficient to locate one or more MAPs (possibly covering   the same domain) at any position in the operator's network.                +-------+                |  HA   |                +-------+       +----+                    |           | CN |                    |           +----+                    |             |                    +-------+-----+                            |                            |RCoA                        +-------+                        |  MAP  |                        +-------+                         |     |                         |     +--------+                         |              |                         |              |                     +-----+         +-----+                     | AR1 |         | AR2 |                     +-----+         +-----+                        LCoA1         LCoA2                    +----+                    | MN |                    +----+   ------------>                               Movement             Figure 1: Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 domain   Upon arrival in a visited network, the mobile node will discover the   global address of the MAP.  This address is stored in the Access   Routers and communicated to the mobile node via Router Advertisements   (RAs).  A new option for RAs is defined later in this specification.   This is needed to inform mobile nodes about the presence of the MAP   (MAP discovery).  The discovery phase will also inform the mobile   node of the distance of the MAP from the mobile node.  For example,   the MAP function could be implemented as shown in Figure 1, and, atSoliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 6]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   the same time, also be implemented in AR1 and AR2.  In this case the   mobile node can choose the first hop MAP or one further up in the   hierarchy of routers.  The details on how to choose a MAP are   provided insection 10.   The process of MAP discovery continues as the mobile node moves from   one subnet to the next.  Every time the mobile node detects movement,   it will also detect whether it is still in the same MAP domain.  The   router advertisement used to detect movement will also inform the   mobile node, through the MAP option, whether it is still in the same   MAP domain.  As the mobile node roams within a MAP domain, it will   continue to receive the same MAP option included in router   advertisements from its AR.  If a change in the advertised MAP's   address is received, the mobile node MUST act on the change by   sending Binding Updates to its HA and correspondent nodes.   If the mobile node is not HMIPv6-aware, then no MAP Discovery will be   performed, resulting in the mobile node using the Mobile IPv6 [1]   protocol for its mobility management.  On the other hand, if the   mobile node is HMIPv6-aware it SHOULD choose to use its HMIPv6   implementation.  If so, the mobile node will first need to register   with a MAP by sending it a BU containing its Home Address and on-link   address (LCoA).  The Home address used in the BU is the RCoA.  The   MAP MUST store this information in its Binding Cache to be able to   forward packets to their final destination when received from the   different correspondent nodes or HAs.   The mobile node will always need to know the original sender of any   received packets to determine if route optimisation is required.   This information will be available to the mobile node because the MAP   does not modify the contents of the original packet.  Normal   processing of the received packets (as described in [1]) will give   the mobile node the necessary information.   To use the network bandwidth in a more efficient manner, a mobile   node may decide to register with more than one MAP simultaneously and   to use each MAP address for a specific group of correspondent nodes.   For example, in Fig 1, if the correspondent node happens to exist on   the same link as the mobile node, it would be more efficient to use   the first hop MAP (in this case assume it is AR1) for communication   between them.  This will avoid sending all packets via the "highest"   MAP in the hierarchy and thus will result in more efficient usage of   network bandwidth.  The mobile node can also use its current on-link   address (LCoA) as a CoA, as specified in [1].  Note that the mobile   node MUST NOT present an RCoA from a MAP's subnet as an LCoA in a   binding update sent to another MAP.  The LCoA included in the binding   update MUST be the mobile node's address derived from the prefix   advertised on its link.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 7]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   If a router advertisement is used for MAP discovery, as described in   this document, all ARs belonging to the MAP domain MUST advertise the   MAP's IP address.  The same concept (advertising the MAP's presence   within its domain) should be used if other methods of MAP discovery   are introduced in future.4.  Mobile IPv6 Extensions   This section outlines the extensions proposed to the binding update   specified in [1].4.1.  Local Binding Update   A new flag is added: the M flag, which indicates MAP registration.   When a mobile node registers with the MAP, the M and A flags MUST be   set to distinguish this registration from a BU being sent to the HA   or a correspondent node.    0                   1                   2                   3    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1                                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                   |            Sequence #         |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |A|H|L|K|M|      Reserved       |            Lifetime           |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |                                                               |   |                                                               |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   Description of extensions to the binding update:       M              If set to 1 it indicates a MAP registration.   It should be noted that this is an extension to the Binding update   specified in [1].Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 8]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 20055.  Neighbour Discovery Extension: The MAP Option Message Format    0                   1                   2                   3    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |     Type      |    Length     |  Dist |  Pref |R|  Reserved   |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |                      Valid Lifetime                           |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |                                                               |   +                                                               +   |                                                               |   +                  Global IP Address for MAP                    +   |                                                               |   +                                                               +   |                                                               |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   Fields:      Type            IPv6 Neighbor Discovery option.  23.      Length          8-bit unsigned integer.  The length of the option                      and MUST be set to 3.      Dist            A 4-bit unsigned integer identifying the Distance                      Between MAP and the receiver of the advertisement.                      Its default value SHOULD be set to 1 if Dynamic                      MAP discovery is used.  The Distance MUST be set                      to 1 if the MAP is on the same link as the mobile                      node.  This field need not be interpreted as the                      number of hops between MAP and the mobile node.                      The only requirement is that the meaning of the                      Distance field is consistently interpreted within                      one Domain.  A Distance value of Zero MUST NOT be                      used.      Pref            The preference of a MAP.  A 4-bit unsigned                      integer.  A decimal value of 15 indicates the                      highest availability.      R               When set to 1, it indicates that the mobile node                      MUST form an RCoA based on the prefix in the MAP                      option.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                      [Page 9]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005      Valid Lifetime  The minimum value (in seconds) of both the                      preferred and valid lifetimes of the prefix                      assigned to the MAP's subnet.  This value                      indicates the validity of the MAP's address and                      consequently the time for which the RCoA is valid.      Global Address  One of the MAP's global addresses.  The 64-bit                      prefix extracted from this address MUST be                      configured in the MAP to be used for RCoA                      construction by the mobile node.   Although not explicitly included in the MAP option, the prefix length   of the MAP's Global IP address MUST be 64.  This prefix is the one   used by the mobile node to form an RCoA, by appending a 64-bit   identifier to the prefix.  Thus, it necessitates a static prefix   length for the MAP's subnet.6.  Protocol Operation   This section describes the HMIPv6 protocol.  In HMIPv6, the mobile   node has two addresses, an RCoA on the MAP's link and an on-link CoA   (LCoA).  This RCoA is formed in a stateless manner by combining the   mobile node's interface identifier and the subnet prefix received in   the MAP option.   As illustrated in this section, this protocol requires updating the   mobile nodes' implementation only.  The HA and correspondent node are   unchanged.  The MAP performs the function of a "local" HA that binds   the mobile node's RCoA to an LCoA.6.1.  Mobile Node Operation   When a mobile node moves into a new MAP domain (i.e., its MAP   changes), it needs to configure two CoAs: an RCoA on the MAP's link   and an on-link CoA (LCoA).  The RCoA is formed in a stateless manner.   After forming the RCoA based on the prefix received in the MAP   option, the mobile node sends a local BU to the MAP with the A and M   flags set.  The local BU is a BU defined in [1] and includes the   mobile node's RCoA in the Home Address Option.  No alternate-CoA   option is needed in this message.  The LCoA is used as the source   address of the BU.  This BU will bind the mobile node's RCoA (similar   to a Home Address) to its LCoA.  The MAP (acting as a HA) will then   perform DAD (when a new binding is being created) for the mobile   node's RCoA on its link and return a Binding Acknowledgement to the   MN.  This acknowledgement identifies the binding as successful or   contains the appropriate fault code.  No new error codes need to beSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 10]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   supported by the mobile node for this operation.  The mobile node   MUST silently ignore binding acknowledgements that do not contain a   routing header type 2, which includes the mobile node's RCoA.   Following a successful registration with the MAP, a bi-directional   tunnel between the mobile node and the MAP is established.  All   packets sent by the mobile node are tunnelled to the MAP.  The outer   header contains the mobile node's LCoA in the source address field   and the MAP's address in the destination address field.  The inner   header contains the mobile node's RCoA in the source address field   and the peer's address in the destination address field.  Similarly,   all packets addressed to the mobile node's RCoA are intercepted by   the MAP and tunnelled to the mobile node's LCoA.   This specification allows a mobile node to use more than one RCoA if   it received more than one MAP option.  In this case, the mobile node   MUST perform the binding update procedure for each RCoA.  In   addition, the mobile node MUST NOT use one RCoA (e.g., RCoA1) derived   from a MAP's prefix (e.g., MAP1) as a care-of address in its binding   update to another MAP (e.g., MAP2).  This would force packets to be   encapsulated several times (twice in this example) on their path to   the mobile node.  This form of multi-level hierarchy will reduce the   protocol's efficiency and performance.   After registering with the MAP, the mobile node MUST register its new   RCoA with its HA by sending a BU that specifies the binding (RCoA,   Home Address) as in Mobile IPv6.  The mobile node's Home Address is   used in the home address option and the RCoA is used as the care-of   address in the source address field.  The mobile node may also send a   similar BU (i.e., that specifies the binding between the Home Address   and the RCoA) to its current correspondent nodes.   The mobile node SHOULD wait for the binding acknowledgement from the   MAP before registering with its HA.  It should be noted that when   binding the RCoA with the HA and correspondent nodes, the binding   lifetime MUST NOT be larger than the mobile node's binding lifetime   with the MAP, which is received in the Binding Acknowledgement.   In order to speed up the handover between MAPs and reduce packet   loss, a mobile node SHOULD send a local BU to its previous MAP,   specifying its new LCoA.  Packets in transit that reach the previous   MAP are then forwarded to the new LCoA.   The MAP will receive packets addressed to the mobile node's RCoA   (from the HA or correspondent nodes).  Packets will be tunnelled from   the MAP to the mobile node's LCoA.  The mobile node will de-capsulate   the packets and process them in the normal manner.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 11]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   When the mobile node moves within the same MAP domain, it should only   register its new LCoA with its MAP.  In this case, the RCoA remains   unchanged.   Note that a mobile node may send a BU containing its LCoA (instead of   its RCoA) to correspondent nodes, which are connected to its same   link.  Packets will then be routed directly without going through the   MAP.6.1.1.  Sending Packets to Correspondent Nodes   The mobile node can communicate with a correspondent node through the   HA, or in a route-optimised manner, as described in [1].  When   communicating through the HA, the message formats in [1] can be re-   used.   If the mobile node communicates directly with the correspondent node   (i.e., the CN has a binding cache entry for the mobile node), the   mobile node MUST use the same care-of address used to create a   binding cache entry in the correspondent node (RCoA) as a source   address.  According to [1], the mobile node MUST also include a Home   Address option in outgoing packets.  The Home address option MUST   contain the mobile node's home address.6.2.  MAP Operations   The MAP acts like a HA; it intercepts all packets addressed to   registered mobile nodes and tunnels them to the corresponding LCoA,   which is stored in its binding cache.   A MAP has no knowledge of the mobile node's Home address.  The mobile   node will send a local BU to the MAP with the M and A flags set.  The   aim of this BU is to inform the MAP that the mobile node has formed   an RCoA (contained in the BU as a Home address).  If successful, the   MAP MUST return a binding acknowledgement to the mobile node,   indicating a successful registration.  This is identical to the HA   operation in [1].  No new error codes are introduced for HMIPv6.  The   binding acknowledgement MUST include a routing header type 2 that   contains the mobile node's RCoA.   The MAP MUST be able to accept packets tunnelled from the mobile   node, with the mobile node being the tunnel entry point and the MAP   being the tunnel exit point.   The MAP acts as a HA for the RCoA.  Packets addressed to the RCOA are   intercepted by the MAP, using proxy Neighbour Advertisement, and then   encapsulated and routed to the mobile node's LCoA.  This operation is   identical to that of the HA described in [1].Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 12]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   A MAP MAY be configured with the list of valid on-link prefixes that   mobile nodes can use to derive LCoAs.  This is useful for network   operators to stop mobile nodes from continuing to use the MAP after   moving to a different administrative domain.  If a mobile node sent a   binding update containing an LCoA that is not in the MAP's "valid   on-link prefixes" list, the MAP could reject the binding update using   existing error code 129 (administratively prohibited).6.3.  Home Agent Operations   The support of HMIPv6 is completely transparent to the HA's   operation.  Packets addressed to a mobile node's Home Address will be   forwarded by the HA to its RCoA, as described in [1].6.4.  Correspondent Node Operations   HMIPv6 is completely transparent to correspondent nodes.6.5.  Local Mobility Management Optimisation within a MAP Domain   In [1], it is stated that for short-term communication, particularly   communication that may easily be retried upon failure, the mobile   node MAY choose to directly use one of its care-of addresses as the   source of the packet, thus not requiring the use of a Home Address   option in the packet.  Such use of the CoA will reduce the overhead   of sending each packet due to the absence of additional options.  In   addition, it will provide an optimal route between the mobile node   and correspondent node.   In HMIPv6, a mobile node can use its RCoA as the source address   without using a Home Address option.  In other words, the RCoA can be   used as a potential source address for upper layers.  Using this   feature, the mobile node will be seen by the correspondent node as a   fixed node while moving within a MAP domain.   This usage of the RCoA does not have the cost of Mobile IPv6 (i.e.,   no bindings or home address options are sent over the Internet), but   still provides local mobility management to the mobile nodes.   Although such use of RCoA does not provide global mobility (i.e.,   communication is broken when a mobile host moves to a new MAP), it   would be useful for several applications (e.g., web browsing).  The   validity of the RCoA as a source address used by applications will   depend on the size of a MAP domain and the speed of the mobile node.   Furthermore, because the support for BU processing in correspondent   nodes is not mandated in [1], this mechanism can provide a way of   obtaining route optimisation without sending BUs to the correspondent   nodes.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 13]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   Enabling this mechanism can be done by presenting the RCoA as a   temporary home address for the mobile node.  This may require an   implementation to augment its source address selection algorithm with   the knowledge of the RCoA in order to use it for the appropriate   applications.6.6.  Location Privacy   In HMIPv6, a mobile node hides its LCoA from its corresponding nodes   and its home agent by using its RCoA in the source field of the   packets that it sends.  As a result, the location tracking of a   mobile node by its corresponding nodes or its home agent is difficult   because they only know its RCoA and not its LCoA.7.  MAP Discovery   This section describes how a mobile node obtains the MAP address and   subnet prefix, and how ARs in a domain discover MAPs.  Two different   methods for MAP discovery are defined below.   Dynamic MAP Discovery is based on propagating the MAP option in   Router Advertisements from the MAP to the mobile node through certain   (configured) router interfaces within the routers in an operator's   network.  This requires manual configuration of the MAP and also that   the routers receiving the MAP option allow them to propagate the   option on certain interfaces.  To ensure a secure communication   between routers, router advertisements that are sent between routers   for Dynamic MAP discovery SHOULD be authenticated (e.g., using AH,   ESP, or SEND).  In the case where this authentication is not possible   (e.g., third party routers exist between the MAP and ARs), a network   operator may prefer to manually configure all the ARs to send the MAP   option, as described in this document.   Manual configuration of the MAP option information in ARs and other   MAPs in the same domain is the default mechanism.  It should also be   possible to configure ARs and MAPs to enable dynamic mechanisms for   MAP Discovery.7.1.  Dynamic MAP Discovery   The process of MAP discovery can be performed in different ways.   Router advertisements are used for Dynamic MAP Discovery by   introducing a new option.  The access router is required to send the   MAP option in its router advertisements.  This option includes the   distance vector from the mobile node (which may not imply the real   distance in terms of the number of hops), the preference for this   particular MAP, the MAP's global IP address and subnet prefixSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 14]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 20057.1.1.  Router Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery   The ARs within a MAP domain may be configured dynamically with the   information related to the MAP options.  ARs may obtain this   information by listening for RAs with MAP options.  Each MAP in the   network needs to be configured with a default preference, the right   interfaces to send this option on, and the IP address to be sent.   The initial value of the "Distance" field MAY be set to a default   value of 1 and MUST NOT be set to zero.  Routers in the MAP domain   should be configured to re-send the MAP option on certain interfaces.   Upon reception of a router advertisement with the MAP option, the   receiving router MUST copy the option and re-send it after   incrementing the Distance field by one.  If the receiving router was   also a MAP, it MUST send its own option, together with the received   option, in the same advertisement.  If a router receives more than   one MAP option for the same MAP (i.e., the same IP address in the MAP   option), from two different interfaces, it MUST choose the option   with the smallest distance field.   In this manner, information about one or more MAPs can be dynamically   passed to a mobile node.  Furthermore, by performing the discovery   phase in this way, different MAP nodes are able to change their   preferences dynamically based on the local policies, node overload or   other load-sharing protocols being used.7.1.2.  MAP Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery   A MAP will be configured to send its option or relay MAP options   belonging to other MAPs onto certain interfaces.  The choice of   interfaces is done by the network administrator (i.e., manual   configuration) and depends on the network topology.  A default   preference value of 10 may be assigned to each MAP.  It should be   noted that a MAP can change its preference value at any time due to   various reasons (e.g., node overload or load sharing).  A preference   value of zero means the MAP SHOULD NOT be chosen by new mobile nodes.   This value could be reached in cases of node overload or partial node   failures.   The MAP option is propagated towards ARs in its domain.  Each router   along the path to an AR will increment the Distance field by one.  If   a router that is also a MAP receives advertisements from other MAPs,   it MUST add its own MAP option and propagate both options to the next   router or to the AR (if it has direct connectivity with the AR).Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 15]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 20057.2.  Mobile Node Operation   When an HMIPv6-aware mobile node receives a router advertisement, it   should search for the MAP option.  One or more options may be found   for different MAP IP addresses.   A mobile node SHOULD register with the MAP having the highest   preference value.  A MAP with a preference value of zero SHOULD NOT   be used for new local BUs (i.e., the mobile node can refresh existing   bindings but cannot create new ones).  However, a mobile node MAY   choose to register with one MAP over another, depending on the value   received in the Distance field, provided that the preference value is   above zero.   A MAP option containing a valid lifetime value of zero means that   this MAP MUST NOT be selected by the MN.  A valid lifetime of zero   indicates a MAP failure.  When this option is received, a mobile node   MUST choose another MAP and create new bindings.  Any existing   bindings with this MAP can be assumed to be lost.  If no other MAP is   available, the mobile node MUST revert to using the Mobile IPv6   protocol, as specified in [1].   If a multihomed mobile node has access to several ARs simultaneously   (on different interfaces), it SHOULD use an LCoA on the link defined   by the AR that advertises its current MAP.   A mobile node MUST store the received option(s) in order to choose at   least one MAP to register with.  Storing the options is essential, as   they will be compared to other options received later for the purpose   of the movement detection algorithm.   If no MAP options are found in the router advertisement, the mobile   node MUST use the Mobile IPv6 protocol, as specified in [1].   If the R flag is set, the mobile node MUST use its RCoA as the Home   Address when performing the MAP registration.  RCoA is then bound to   the LCoA in the MAP's Binding Cache.   A mobile node MAY choose to register with more than one MAP   simultaneously, or use both the RCoA and its LCoA as care-of   addresses simultaneously with different correspondent nodes.8.  Updating Previous MAPs   When a mobile node moves into a new MAP domain, the mobile node may   send a BU to the previous MAP requesting it to forward packets   addressed to the mobile node's new CoA.  An administrator MAY   restrict the MAP from forwarding packets to LCoAs outside the MAP'sSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 16]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   domain.  However, it is RECOMMENDED that MAPs be allowed to forward   packets to LCoAs associated with some of the ARs in neighbouring MAP   domains, provided that they are located within the same   administrative domain.   For instance, a MAP could be configured to forward packets to LCoAs   associated with ARs that are geographically adjacent to ARs on the   boundary of its domain.  This will allow for a smooth inter-MAP   handover as it allows the mobile node to continue to receive packets   while updating the new MAP, its HA and, potentially, correspondent   nodes.9.  Notes on MAP Selection by the Mobile Node   HMIPv6 provides a flexible mechanism for local mobility management   within a visited network.  As explained earlier, a MAP can exist   anywhere in the operator's network (including the AR).  Several MAPs   can be located within the same domain independently of each other.   In addition, overlapping MAP domains are also allowed and   recommended.  Both static and dynamic hierarchies are supported.   When the mobile node receives a router advertisement including a MAP   option, it should perform actions according to the following movement   detection mechanisms.  In a Hierarchical Mobile IP network such as   the one described in this document, the mobile node should be:      - "Eager" to perform new bindings      - "Lazy" in releasing existing bindings   The above means that the mobile node should register with any "new"   MAP advertised by the AR (Eager).  The method by which the mobile   node determines whether the MAP is a "new" MAP is described insection 9.1.  The mobile node should not release existing bindings   until it no longer receives the MAP option (or receives it with a   lifetime of zero) or the lifetime of its existing binding expires   (Lazy).  This Eager-Lazy approach, described above, will assist in   providing a fallback mechanism in case of the failure of one of the   MAP routers, as it will reduce the time it takes for a mobile node to   inform its correspondent nodes and HA about its new care-of address.9.1.  MAP Selection in a Distributed-MAP Environment   The mobile node needs to consider several factors to optimally select   one or more MAPs, where several MAPs are available in the same   domain.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 17]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   There are no benefits foreseen in selecting more than one MAP and   forcing packets to be sent from the higher MAP down through a   hierarchy of MAPs.  This approach may add forwarding delays and   eliminate the robustness of IP routing between the highest MAP and   the mobile node; therefore, it is prohibited by this specification.   Allowing more than one MAP ("above" the AR) within a network should   not imply that the mobile node forces packets to be routed down the   hierarchy of MAPs.  However, placing more than one MAP "above" the AR   can be used for redundancy and as an optimisation for the different   mobility scenarios experienced by mobile nodes.  The MAPs are used   independently of each other by the MN (e.g., each MAP is used for   communication to a certain set of CNs).   In terms of the Distance-based selection in a network with several   MAPs, a mobile node may choose to register with the furthest MAP to   avoid frequent re-registrations.  This is particularly important for   fast mobile nodes that will perform frequent handoffs.  In this   scenario, the choice of a more distant MAP would reduce the   probability of having to change a MAP and informing all correspondent   nodes and the HA.  This specification does not provide an algorithm   for the distance-based MAP selection.  However, such an algorithm may   be introduced in future extensions utilising information about the   speed of mobility from lower layers.   In a scenario where several MAPs are discovered by the mobile node in   one domain, the mobile node may need some sophisticated algorithms to   be able to select the appropriate MAP.  These algorithms would have   the mobile node speed as an input (for distance based selection)   combined with the preference field in the MAP option.  However, this   specification proposes that the mobile node uses the following   algorithm as a default, where other optimised algorithms are not   available.  The following algorithm is simply based on selecting the   MAP that is most distant, provided that its preference value did not   reach a value of zero.  The mobile node operation is shown below:   1.  Receive and parse all MAP options   2.  Arrange MAPs in a descending order, starting with the furthest       away MAP (i.e., MAP option having largest Dist field)   3.  Select first MAP in list   4.  If either the preference value or the valid lifetime fields are       set to zero, select the following MAP in the list.   5.  Repeat step (4) while new MAP options still exist, until a MAP is       found with a non-zero preference value and a non-zero valid       lifetime.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 18]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   Implementing the steps above would result in mobile nodes selecting,   by default, the most distant or furthest available MAP.  This will   continue until the preference value reduces to zero.  Following this,   mobile nodes will start selecting another MAP.9.2.  MAP Selection in a Flat Mobility Management Architecture   Network operators may choose a flat architecture in some cases where   a Mobile IPv6 handover may be considered a rare event.  In these   scenarios, operators may choose to include the MAP function in ARs   only.  The inclusion of the MAP function in ARs can still be useful   to reduce the time required to update all correspondent nodes and the   HA.  In this scenario, a mobile node may choose a MAP (in the AR) as   an anchor point when performing a handoff.  This kind of dynamic   hierarchy (or anchoring) is only recommended for cases where inter-AR   u0movement is not frequent.10.  Detection and Recovery from MAP Failures   This specification introduces a MAP that can be seen as a local Home   Agent in a visited network.  A MAP, like a Home Agent, is a single   point of failure.  If a MAP fails, its binding cache content will be   lost, resulting in loss of communication between mobile and   correspondent nodes.  This situation may be avoided by using more   than one MAP on the same link and by utilising some form of context   transfer protocol between them.  Alternatively, future versions of   the Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol [4] or HA redundancy protocols   may allow networks to recover from MAP failures.   In cases where such protocols are not supported, the mobile node   would need to detect MAP failures.  The mobile node can detect this   situation when it receives a router advertisement containing a MAP   option with a lifetime of zero.  The mobile node should start the MAP   discovery process and attempt to register with another MAP.  After it   has selected and registered with another MAP, it will also need to   inform correspondent nodes and the Home Agent if its RCoA has   changed.  Note that in the presence of a protocol that transfers   binding cache entries between MAPs for redundancy purposes, a new MAP   may be able to provide the same RCoA to the mobile node (e.g., if   both MAPs advertise the same prefix in the MAP option).  This would   save the mobile node from updating correspondent nodes and the Home   Agent.   Access routers can be triggered to advertise a MAP option with a   lifetime of zero (indicating MAP failure) in different ways:      - By manual intervention.      - In a dynamic manner.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 19]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   ARs can perform Dynamic detection of MAP failure by sending ICMP Echo   request messages to the MAP regularly (e.g., every ten seconds).  If   no response is received, an AR may try to aggressively send echo   requests to the MAP for a short period of time (e.g., once every 5   seconds for 15 seconds); if no reply is received, a MAP option may be   sent with a valid lifetime value of zero.   This specification does not mandate a particular recovery mechanism.   However, any similar mechanism between the MAP and an AR SHOULD be   secure to allow for message authentication, integrity protection, and   protection against replay attacks.11.  IANA ConsiderationsSection 4 introduces a new flag (M) to the Binding Update specified   inRFC 3775.Section 5 introduces a new IPv6 Neighbour Discovery Option called the   MAP Option.  IANA has assigned the Option Type value 23 for the MAP   Option within the option numbering space for IPv6 Neighbour Discovery   messages.12.  Security Considerations   This specification introduces a new concept to Mobile IPv6, namely, a   Mobility Anchor Point that acts as a local Home Agent.  It is crucial   that the security relationship between the mobile node and the MAP is   strong; it MUST involve mutual authentication, integrity protection,   and protection against replay attacks.  Confidentiality may be needed   for payload traffic, but is not required for binding updates to the   MAP.  The absence of any of these protections may lead to malicious   mobile nodes impersonating other legitimate ones or impersonating a   MAP.  Any of these attacks will undoubtedly cause undesirable impacts   to the mobile node's communication with all correspondent nodes   having knowledge of the mobile node's RCoA.   Three different relationships (related to securing binding updates)   need to be considered:      1) The mobile node - MAP      2) The mobile node - Home Agent      3) The mobile node - correspondent node12.1.  Mobile Node-MAP Security   In order to allow a mobile node to use the MAP's forwarding service,   initial authorisation (specifically for the service, not for the   RCoA) MAY be needed.  Authorising a mobile node to use the MAPSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 20]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   service can be done based on the identity of the mobile node   exchanged during the SA negotiation process.  The authorisation may   be granted based on the mobile node's identity, or based on the   identity of a Certificate Authority (CA) that the MAP trusts.  For   instance, if the mobile node presents a certificate signed by a   trusted entity (e.g., a CA that belongs to the same administrative   domain, or another trusted roaming partner), it would be sufficient   for the MAP to authorise the use of its service.  Note that this   level of authorisation is independent of authorising the use of a   particular RCoA.  Similarly, the mobile node would trust the MAP if   it presents a certificate signed by the same CA or by another CA that   the mobile node is configured to trust (e.g., a roaming partner).   HMIPv6 uses an additional registration between the mobile node and   its current MAP.  As explained in this document, when a mobile node   moves into a new domain (i.e., served by a new MAP), it obtains an   RCoA, an LCoA and registers the binding between these two addresses   with the new MAP.  The MAP then verifies whether the RCoA has not   been registered yet and, if so, it creates a binding cache entry with   the RCoA and LCoA.  Whenever the mobile node gets a new LCoA, it   needs to send a new BU that specifies the binding between RCoA and   its new LCoA.  This BU needs to be authenticated, otherwise any host   could send a BU for the mobile node's RCoA and hijack the mobile   node's packets.  However, because the RCoA is temporary and is not   bound to a particular node, a mobile node does not have to initially   (before the first binding update) prove that it owns its RCoA (unlike   the requirement on home addresses in Mobile IPv6) when it establishes   a Security Association with its MAP.  A MAP only needs to ensure that   a BU for a particular RCoA was issued by the same mobile node that   established the Security Association for that RCoA.   The MAP does not need to have prior knowledge of the identity of the   mobile node nor its Home Address.  As a result the SA between the   mobile node and the MAP can be established using any key   establishment protocols such as IKE.  A return routability test is   not necessary.   The MAP needs to set the SA for the RCoA (not the LCoA).  This can be   performed with IKE [2].  The mobile node uses its LCoA as the source   address, but specifies that the RCoA should be used in the SA.  This   is achieved by using the RCoA as the identity in IKE Phase 2   negotiation.  This step is identical to the use of the home address   in IKE phase 2.   If a binding cache entry exists for a given RCoA, the MAP's IKE   policy check MUST point to the SA used to install the entry.  If the   mobile node's credentials stored in the existing SA do not match the   ones provided in the current negotiation, the MAP MUST reject the newSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 21]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   SA establishment request for such RCoA with an INVALID-ID-INFORMATION   notification [2].  This is to prevent two different mobile nodes from   registering (intentionally or not) the same RCoA.  Upon receiving   this notification, the mobile node SHOULD generate a new RCoA and   restart the IKE negotiation.  Alternatively, a MAP may decide that,   if a binding cache entry already exists for a particular RCoA, no new   security association should be established for such RCoA; this is   independent of the mobile node credentials.  This prevents the mobile   node from being able to re-establish a security association for the   same RCoA (i.e., to change session keys).  However, this is not a   major problem because the SA will typically only be used to protect   signalling traffic when a MN moves, and not for the actual data   traffic sent to arbitrary nodes.   Binding updates between the MAP and the mobile node MUST be protected   with either AH or ESP in transport mode.  When ESP is used, a non-   null authentication algorithm MUST be used.12.2.  Mobile Node-Correspondent Node Security   Mobile IPv6 [1] defines a return routability procedure that allows   mobile and correspondent nodes to authenticate binding updates and   acknowledgements.  This specification does not impact the return   routability test defined in [1].  However, it is important to note   that mobile node implementers need to be careful when selecting the   source address of the HOTI and COTI messages, defined in [1].  The   source address used in HOTI messages MUST be the mobile node's home   address.  The packet containing the HOTI message is encapsulated   twice.  The inner encapsulating header contains the RCoA in the   source address field and the home agent's address in the destination   address field.  The outer encapsulating header contains the mobile   node's LCoA in the source address field and the MAP's address in the   destination field.12.3.  Mobile Node-Home Agent Security   The security relationship between the mobile node and its Home Agent,   as discussed in [1], is not impacted by this specification.13.  Acknowledgments   The authors would like to thank Conny Larsson (Ericsson) and Mattias   Pettersson (Ericsson) for their valuable input to this document.  The   authors would also like to thank the members of the French RNRT   MobiSecV6 project (BULL, France Telecom and INRIA) for testing the   first implementation and for their valuable feedback.  The INRIA   HMIPv6 project is partially funded by the French Government.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 22]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   In addition, the authors would like to thank the following members of   the working group in alphabetical order: Samita Chakrabarti (Sun),   Gregory Daley (Monash University), Francis Dupont (GET/Enst   Bretagne), Gopal Dommety (Cisco), Eva Gustaffson (Ericsson), Dave   Johnson (Rice University), Annika Jonsson (Ericsson), James Kempf   (Docomo labs), Martti Kuparinen (Ericsson) Fergal Ladley, Gabriel   Montenegro (Sun), Nick "Sharkey" Moore (Monash University) Erik   Nordmark (Sun), Basavaraj Patil (Nokia), Brett Pentland (Monash   University), and Alper Yegin (Samsung) for their comments on the   document.14.  References14.1.  Normative References   [1]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in        IPv6",RFC 3775, June 2004.   [2]  Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header",RFC 2402,        November 1998.   [3]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement        Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.14.2.  Informative References   [4]  Koodli, R., "Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6",RFC 4068, July        2005.   [5]  Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating        Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address        Spoofing",BCP 38,RFC 2827, May 2000.   [6]  Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure        Neighbor Discovery (SEND)",RFC 3971, March 2005.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 23]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005Appendix A: Fast Mobile IPv6 Handovers and HMIPv6   Fast Handovers are required to ensure that the layer 3 (Mobile IP)   handover delay is minimised, thus also minimising, and possibly   eliminating, the period of service disruption which normally occurs   when a mobile node moves between two ARs.  This period of service   disruption usually occurs due to the time required by the mobile node   to update its HA using Binding Updates after it moves between ARs.   During this time period the mobile node cannot resume or continue   communications.  The mechanism to achieve Fast Handovers with Mobile   IPv6 is described in [5] and is briefly summarised here.  This   mechanism allows the anticipation of the layer 3 handover, such that   data traffic can be redirected to the mobile node's new location   before it moves there.   While the mobile node is connected to its previous Access Router   (PAR) and is about to move to a new Access Router (NAR), the Fast   Handovers in Mobile IPv6 requires in sequence:   1) The mobile node to obtain a new care-of address at the NAR while      connected to the PAR.   2) New CoA to be used at NAR case: the mobile node to send a F-BU      (Fast BU) to its previous anchor point (i.e., PAR) to update its      binding cache with the mobile node's new CoA while still attached      to PAR.   3) The previous anchor point (i.e., PAR) to start forwarding packets      destined for the mobile node to the mobile node's new CoA at NAR      (or old CoA tunnelled to NAR, if new CoA is not applicable).   4) Old CoA to be used at NAR case: the mobile node to send a F-BU      (Fast BU) to its previous anchor point (i.e., PAR), after it has      moved and attached to NAR, in order to update its binding cache      with the mobile node's new CoA.   The mobile node or PAR may initiate the Fast Handover procedure by   using wireless link-layer information or link-layer triggers that   inform that the mobile node will soon be handed off between two   wireless access points respectively attached to PAR and NAR.  If the   "trigger" is received at the mobile node, the mobile node will   initiate the layer-3 handover process by sending a Proxy Router   Solicitation message to PAR.  Instead, if the "trigger" is received   at PAR, then it will transmit a Proxy Router Advertisement to the   appropriate mobile node, without the need for solicitations.  The   basic Fast Handover message exchanges are illustrated in Figure A.1.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 24]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005                        +-----------+  1a. HI          +-----+                        |           | ---------------->| NAR |                        |    PAR    |  1b. HAck        |     |                        +-----------+ <--------------- +-----+                        ^  |        ^          (2a. RtSolPr) |  | 2b     |                        |  | Pr     | 3. Fast BU (F-BU)                        |  | RtAdv  | 4. Fast BA  (F-BACK)                        |  v        v                        +------------+                        |    MN      |                        +------------+    - - - - - ->                                          Movement             Figure A.1: Fast Mobile IPv6 Handover Protocol   The mobile node obtains a new care-of address while connected to PAR   by means of router advertisements containing information from the NAR   (Proxy Router Advertisement, which may be sent due to a Proxy Router   Solicitation).  The PAR will validate the mobile node's new CoA by   sending a Handover Initiate (HI) message to the NAR.  The new CoA   sent in the HI message is formed by appending the mobile node's   current interface identifier to the NAR's prefix.  Based on the   response generated in the Handover Acknowledge (HAck) message, the   PAR will either generate a tunnel to the mobile node's new CoA (if   the address was valid) or generate a tunnel to the NAR's address (if   the address was already in use on the new subnet).  If the address   was already in use on the new subnet, it is assumed that there will   be no time to perform another attempt to configure the mobile node   with a CoA on the new link.  Therefore, the NAR will generate a host   route for the mobile node using its old CoA.  Note that message 1a   may precede message 2b or occur at the same time.   In [5], the ARs act as local Home Agents, which hold binding caches   for the mobile nodes and receive Binding Updates.  This makes these   ARs function like the MAP specified in this document.  Also, it is   quite possible that the ARs are not directly connected, but   communicate through an aggregation router.  Therefore, such an   aggregation router is also an ideal position for the MAP   functionality.  These are two ways of integrating the HMIPv6 and Fast   Handover mechanisms.  The first involves placing MAPs in place of the   ARs, which is a natural step.  The second scenario involves placing   the MAP in an aggregation router "above" the ARs.  In this case, [5]   specifies forwarding of packets between PAR and NAR.  This could be   inefficient in terms of delay and bandwidth efficiency because   packets will traverse the MAP-PAR link twice and packets will arrive   out of order at the mobile node.  Using the MAP in the aggregationSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 25]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   router would improve the efficiency of Fast Handovers, which could   make use of the MAP to redirect traffic, thus saving delay and   bandwidth between the aggregation router and the PAR.                                                 +---------+                                                 |   MAP   |                                 +-------------->|         |                                 |               +---------+                                 |                 |     ^                                 |          1a. HI |     |                                 |                 |     |                                 |                 |     | 1b. HAck                                 |                 v     |                  +---------+    |               +---------+                  |         |    |               |   NAR   |                  |   PAR   |    |               |         |                  +---------+    |               +---------+                     ^  |        |       (2a. RtSolPr) |  | 2b     |                     |  | Pr     | 3. Fast BU (F-BU) from mobile node to                     |  |             MAP                     |  | RtAdv  | 4. Fast BA (F-BACK) from MAP to                     |  |        |    mobile node                     |  v        v                    +------------+                    |     MN     |    Movement                    +------------+    - - - - - ->       Figure A.2: Fast Mobile IPv6 Handover Protocol using HMIPv6   In Figure A.2, the HI/HAck messages now occur between the MAP and NAR   in order to check the validity of the newly requested care-of address   and to establish a temporary tunnel should the new care-of address   not be valid.  Therefore, the same functionality of the Fast Handover   procedure is kept, but the anchor point is moved from the PAR to the   MAP.   As in the previous Fast Handover procedure, in the network-determined   case the layer-2 "triggers" at the PAR will cause the PAR to send a   Proxy Router Advertisement to the mobile node with the MAP option.   In the mobile-determined case, this is preceded by a Proxy Router   Solicitation from the mobile node.  The same layer-2 trigger at PAR   in the network-determined case could be used to independently   initiate Context Transfer (e.g., QoS) between PAR and NAR.  In the   mobile-determined case, the trigger at PAR could be replaced by the   reception of a Proxy Router Solicitation or F-BU.  Context Transfer   is being worked on in the IETF Seamoby WG.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 26]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005   The combination of Fast Handover and HMIPv6 allows the anticipation   of the layer 3 handoff, such that data traffic can be efficiently   redirected to the mobile node's new location before it moves there.   However, it is not easy to determine the correct time to start   forwarding traffic from the MAP to the mobile node's new location,   which has an impact on how smooth the handoff will be.  The same   issues arise in [5] with respect to when to start forwarding between   PAR and NAR.  Packet loss will occur if this is performed too late or   too early with respect to the time in which the mobile node detaches   from PAR and attaches to NAR.  Such packet loss is likely to occur if   the MAP updates its binding cache upon receiving the anticipated   F-BU, because it is not known exactly when the mobile node will   perform or complete the layer-2 handover to NAR, relative to when the   mobile node transmits the F-BU.  Also, some measure is needed to   support the case in which the mobile node's layer-2 handover   unexpectedly fails (after Fast Handover has been initiated) or when   the mobile node moves quickly back-and-forth between ARs (ping-pong).   Simultaneous bindings [6] provide a solution to these issues.  In   [6], a new Simultaneous Bindings Flag is added to the Fast Binding   Update (F-BU) message and a new Simultaneous Bindings suboption is   defined for the Fast Binding Acknowledgement (F-BAck) message.  Using   this enhanced mechanism, upon layer-3 handover, traffic for the   mobile node will be sent from the MAP to both PAR and NAR for a   certain period, thus isolating the mobile node from layer-2 effects   such as handover timing, ping-pong, or handover failure and providing   the mobile node with uninterrupted layer-3 connectivity.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 27]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005Authors' Addresses   Hesham Soliman   Flarion Technologies   EMail: h.soliman@flarion.com   Claude Castelluccia   INRIA Rhone-Alpes   655 avenue de l'Europe   38330 Montbonnot Saint-Martin   France   EMail: claude.castelluccia@inria.fr   Phone: +33 4 76 61 52 15   Karim El Malki   Ericsson AB   LM Ericssons Vag. 8   126 25 Stockholm   Sweden   EMail: karim@elmalki.homeip.net   Ludovic Bellier   INRIA Rhone-Alpes   655 avenue de l'Europe   38330 Montbonnot Saint-Martin   France   EMail: ludovic.bellier@inria.frSoliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 28]

RFC 4140                         HMIPv6                      August 2005Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions   contained inBCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors   retain all their rights.   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.Intellectual Property   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be   found inBCP 78 andBCP 79.   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository athttp://www.ietf.org/ipr.   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-   ipr@ietf.org.Acknowledgement   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the   Internet Society.Soliman, et al.               Experimental                     [Page 29]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp