Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


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

PROPOSED STANDARD
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                       S. KrishnanRequest for Comments: 7077                                      EricssonCategory: Standards Track                                  S. GundavelliISSN: 2070-1721                                                    Cisco                                                              M. Liebsch                                                                     NEC                                                               H. Yokota                                                                    KDDI                                                             J. Korhonen                                                                Broadcom                                                           November 2013Update Notifications for Proxy Mobile IPv6Abstract   This document specifies protocol enhancements for allowing the local   mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain to asynchronously   notify the mobile access gateway about changes related to a mobility   session.  These Update Notification messages are exchanged using a   new Mobility Header message type specifically designed for this   purpose.Status of This Memo   This is an Internet Standards Track document.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   Internet Standards is available inSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7077.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of   publication of this document.  Please review these documents   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as   described in the Simplified BSD License.Table of Contents1. Introduction ....................................................32. Conventions and Terminology .....................................42.1. Conventions ................................................42.2. Terminology ................................................43. Notification Message - Usage Examples ...........................44. Message Formats .................................................54.1. Update Notification (UPN) ..................................54.2. Update Notification Acknowledgement (UPA) ..................75. LMA Considerations ..............................................95.1. Constructing the Update Notification Message ..............10      5.2. Receiving the Update Notification Acknowledgement           Message ...................................................116. MAG Considerations .............................................126.1. Receiving the Update Notification Message .................12      6.2. Constructing the Update Notification Acknowledgement           Message ...................................................157. Protocol Configuration Variables ...............................168. Security Considerations ........................................169. Acknowledgements ...............................................1710. IANA Considerations ...........................................1711. References ....................................................1911.1. Normative References .....................................1911.2. Informative References ...................................19Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 20131.  Introduction   In some situations, there is a need for the local mobility anchor   (LMA) to send asynchronous notification messages to the mobile access   gateway (MAG) in the course of a mobility session.  These situations   include changes to mobility session parameters and policy parameters.   In this context, "Asynchronous messages" is used to mean messages   that are not synchronous with the Proxy Binding Update and Proxy   Binding Acknowledgement messages of the base Proxy Mobile IPv6   specification [RFC5213].  The base Proxy Mobile IPv6 specification   does not have a provision for sending unsolicited Update Notification   messages from the local mobility anchor to the mobile access gateway.   Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213] is a network-based mobility management   protocol.  It is designed to provide IP mobility management support   to a mobile node without requiring the participation of the mobile   node in any IP mobility-related signaling.  The protocol defines two   mobility management entities: the LMA and the MAG.  These entities   are responsible for managing IP mobility management support for a   mobile node in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain.  The setup of the mobility   session is initiated by the mobile access gateway by sending a Proxy   Binding Update message and acknowledged by the local mobility anchor   in the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message.  Once the mobility   session is set up, currently there is no mechanism for the local   mobility anchor to inform the mobile access gateway about changes to   the mobility session or any parameters related to the mobility   session.  However, there are mechanisms in the Proxy Mobile IPv6   protocol that allow a local mobility anchor to send signaling   messages to the mobile access gateway asynchronously, as defined in   the Proxy Mobile IPv6 Heartbeat message [RFC5847] or in the Binding   Revocation message [RFC5846], but these signaling messages are   designed for a very specific purpose and are not sufficient for   supporting a notification framework.   One such scenario where such a mechanism is needed is when the local   mobility anchor wants to inform the mobile access gateway that it   needs to re-register the mobility session for a mobile node.  It is   possible to achieve a similar effect by using a short lifetime for   the mobility sessions, but in several networks this results in an   unacceptable, and mostly unnecessary, increase in the signaling   load and overhead.  A more suitable scenario would be to enable   demand-based signaling from the local mobility anchor to one or more   mobile access gateways.  Another example is when there is a change in   a QoS policy [PMIPv6-QoS], an IP flow mobility policy   [PMIPv6-FLOW-MOB], or an IPv4 traffic offload policy [RFC6909] for a   mobility session.  In this case, the local mobility anchor wants to   request that the mobile access gateway perform re-registration of theKrishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   mobility session in order to update the policies associated with the   mobility session of a mobile node.   This document defines a new Mobility Header message for allowing the   local mobility anchor to send notification messages to the mobile   access gateway and a corresponding Mobility Header message for the   mobile access gateway to acknowledge the notification message.  The   purpose of the notification message is twofold: (1) to enable the   local mobility anchor to notify the mobile access gateway about the   updated session parameters and (2) to enable the local mobility   anchor to request that the mobile access gateway renegotiate the   session parameters.2.  Conventions and Terminology2.1.  Conventions   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 [RFC2119].2.2.  Terminology   All the mobility-related terms used in this document are to be   interpreted as defined in the base Proxy Mobile IPv6 specifications   [RFC5213] and [RFC5844].3.  Notification Message - Usage Examples   Use Case 1: Consider a use case where the local mobility anchor wants   the mobile access gateway to re-register a specific mobility session.   MN     MAG       LMA   |------>|        |    1.  Mobile Node Attach   |       |------->|    2.  Proxy Binding Update   |       |<-------|    3.  Proxy Binding Acknowledgement   |       |========|    4.  Tunnel/Route Setup   |       |        |   |       |<-------|    5.  Update Notification (FORCE-REREGISTRATION)   |       |------->|    6.  Update Notification Acknowledgement   |       |        |   |       |------->|    7.  Proxy Binding Update   |       |<-------|    8.  Proxy Binding Acknowledgement   |       |        |            Figure 1: Update Notification: FORCE-REREGISTRATIONKrishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   Use Case 2: Consider a use case where the local mobility anchor wants   to notify the mobile access gateway of the updated session   parameters, for example, an updated QoS profile or an updated IPv4   offload policy.   MN     MAG     LMA   |------>|        |    1.  Mobile Node Attach   |       |------->|    2.  Proxy Binding Update   |       |<-------|    3.  Proxy Binding Acknowledgement   |       |========|    4.  Tunnel/Route Setup   |       |        |   |       |<-------|    5.  Update Notification   |       |        |           (UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS)   |       |------->|    6.  Update Notification Acknowledgement   |       +        |    7.  MAG applies the new policy option   |       |        |         Figure 2: Update Notification: UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS4.  Message Formats4.1.  Update Notification (UPN)   The Update Notification is a Mobility Header message that has an MH   Type value of 19.  It is used by the local mobility anchor to notify   the mobile access gateway that some parameters related to the   mobility session have changed.   The format of the Update Notification message is as follows:   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 #          |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |    Notification Reason        |A|D|          Reserved         |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |                                                               |   .                                                               .   .                        Mobility options                       .   .                                                               .   |                                                               |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                   Figure 3: Update Notification MessageKrishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   Sequence Number      This 16-bit unsigned integer is used by the local mobility anchor      to match the received Update Notification Acknowledgement message      with this Update Notification message.  This Sequence Number could      be a random number and can be managed under the same variable used      in Proxy Mobile IPv6 signaling messages [RFC5213].      Implementations MUST ensure that there is no collision between the      Sequence Numbers of all outstanding Update Notification messages      at any time.   Notification Reason      This 16-bit unsigned integer indicates the Notification Reason      code.  This code corresponds to the reason that the local mobility      anchor sent the Update Notification to the mobile access gateway.      This field does not contain any structure and MUST be treated as      an enumeration.  The reason code can indicate a vendor-specific      reason if the semantics of the Update Notification message are to      be based on the attached vendor-specific options, not solely from      the reason code.  These attached options can be deployment      specific and are not specified in this document.  The following      Notification Reason values are currently defined:      (0) -     Reserved                This value is currently reserved and cannot be used.      (1) -     FORCE-REREGISTRATION                Request to re-register the session by sending a Proxy                Binding Update for the mobility session.      (2) -     UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS                Request to apply the updated session parameters obtained                from the message on the mobility session.      (3) -     VENDOR-SPECIFIC-REASON                This Notification Reason is for vendor-specific use.                The processing rules are to be based on the                Vendor-Specific Mobility option(s) [RFC5094] present in                the message.      (4) -     ANI-PARAMS-REQUESTED                Request to send currently known Access Network                Identifier (ANI) [RFC6757] parameters for the mobility                session.      (255) -   Reserved                This value is currently reserved and cannot be used.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   Acknowledgement Requested Flag ((A) Flag)      When this flag is set to a value of (1), it is an indication that      the local mobility anchor is requesting that the mobile access      gateway send an Update Notification Acknowledgement message.  When      this flag is set to a value of (0), it is an indication that the      local mobility anchor is not requesting any Update Notification      Acknowledgement messages.   Retransmit Flag ((D) Flag)      When this flag is set to a value of (1), it is an indication that      the message is a retransmitted message and has the same Sequence      Number and other message contents as in the previously sent      message.  The (D) flag is set for retransmitted request messages,      to aid the reliable detection of duplicate requests at the      receiver of the request message.  It is set when originating      requests that have not yet been acknowledged, as an indication of      a possible duplicate due to a retransmission.  This flag MUST be      cleared when sending a request for the first time for a given      Sequence Number; otherwise, the sender MUST set this flag.   Reserved      This field is unused for now.  The value MUST be initialized to 0      by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.   Mobility Options      This variable-length field is of such length that the complete      Mobility Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long; the Pad1      and PadN options [RFC6275] can be used for padding.  This field      contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options.  Any of the      Mobility Header options, including Vendor-Specific Mobility      options [RFC5094], can be included here.  The receiver MUST ignore      and skip any options that it does not understand.  These mobility      options are used by the mobile access gateway to identify the      specific binding for which the Update Notification message is      sent.4.2.  Update Notification Acknowledgement (UPA)   The Update Notification Acknowledgement is a Mobility Header message   that has an MH Type value of 20.  The mobile access gateway sends   this message in order to acknowledge that it has received an Update   Notification message with the (A) flag set and to indicate the status   after processing the message.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   The format of the Update Notification Acknowledgement message is as   follows:   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 #          |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |   Status Code |                   Reserved                    |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |                                                               |   .                                                               .   .                        Mobility options                       .   .                                                               .   |                                                               |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+           Figure 4: Update Notification Acknowledgement Message   Sequence Number      This 16-bit unsigned integer is copied from the Update      Notification message and is used for matching the Update      Notification Acknowledgement message with the Update Notification      message.   Status Code      This 8-bit unsigned integer indicates the status code and      specifies the result of the processing of the Update Notification      message.  Status codes between 0 and 127 signify successful      processing of the Update Notification message, and codes between      128 and 255 signify that an error occurred during processing of      the Update Notification message.  The following status code values      are currently defined:      (0) -     SUCCESS                The mobile access gateway successfully processed the                received Update Notification message.      (128) -   FAILED-TO-UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS                The mobile access gateway was not able to apply the                session parameters sent by the local mobility anchor in                the Update Notification message.      (129) -   MISSING-VENDOR-SPECIFIC-OPTION                The received Update Notification message does not have                the required Vendor-Specific Mobility option(s) needed                for handling the message.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   Reserved      This field is unused for now.  The value MUST be initialized to 0      by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.   Mobility Options      This variable-length field is of such length that the complete      Mobility Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long; the Pad1      and PadN options [RFC6275] can be used for padding.  This field      contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options.  Any of the      Mobility Header options, including Vendor-Specific Mobility      options [RFC5094], can be included here.  The receiver MUST ignore      and skip any options that it does not understand.  These mobility      options are used by the mobile access gateway to identify the      specific binding for which the Update Notification Acknowledgement      message is sent.5.  LMA Considerations   o  The local mobility anchor sends the Update Notification message in      response to a condition that is specified in the Notification      Reason field.  The Notification Reason field in the Update      Notification message MUST be set to a specific value that      identifies the reason for which the Update Notification message is      being sent.  The Notification Reason, based on the chosen value,      may require a specific action that the mobile access gateway needs      to perform (for example, requiring re-registration of a mobility      session).   o  The Update Notification message MUST include either the Mobile      Node Identifier option [RFC4283] or the Mobile Node Group      Identifier option [RFC6602].      *  If the Mobile Node Identifier option is present, it indicates         that the Update Notification message is sent for that specific         mobility session.      *  If the Mobile Node Group Identifier option is present, it         indicates that the Update Notification message is sent for the         set of mobility sessions identified by the Group Identifier.         The Group Identifier is negotiated as part of the initial Proxy         Mobile IPv6 signaling.  If the Group Identifier is not         negotiated in the initial Proxy Mobile IPv6 signaling, a value         of (1) for the Group Identifier can always be used.  The Group         Identifier value of (1) identifies all the mobility sessions         established between that local mobility anchor and the mobile         access gateway.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   o  The Update Notification message MAY contain a modified session      parameter in the form of a mobility option (e.g., an IPv4 traffic      offload option or a QoS option), so the mobile access gateway can      apply them on the identified mobility session.5.1.  Constructing the Update Notification Message   The local mobility anchor, when sending the Update Notification   message to the mobile access gateway, has to construct the message as   specified below:   o  For requesting an Acknowledgement message and an indication about      the result of processing the message from the mobile access      gateway for the Update Notification message, the (A) flag in the      Update Notification message MUST be set to a value of (1);      otherwise, it MUST be set to a value of (0).  However, if the      Notification Reason is set to a value of (1)      "FORCE-REREGISTRATION" or (4) "ANI-PARAMS-REQUESTED", then it is      RECOMMENDED that the (A) flag be set to a value of (0).  For      certain general notifications that are informational in nature,      the local mobility anchor may choose not to request      acknowledgement for the Update Notification message.   o  The Sequence Number field of the message MUST be initialized to a      random number and increased monotonically for subsequent messages.      Once the Sequence Number hits the maximum value, it should be      wrapped around to 0.  Furthermore, if the message is a      retransmission of a previously sent message, then the Sequence      Number value is not changed.   o  When using IPv4 transport, the source address in the IPv4 header      MUST be set to the local mobility anchor's IPv4 address      (IPv4-LMAA), and the destination address in the IPv4 header MUST      be set to the IPv4-Proxy-CoA (Care-of Address) of the mobile      access gateway.  The Mobility Header (without the IPv6 header)      containing the Update Notification message is encapsulated in a      UDP header with the destination port of 5436 [RFC5844].  If IPsec      Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) [RFC4303] is used to protect      signaling, the packet is processed using transport mode ESP.   o  The format of the Update Notification message sent over IPv4 and      protected using ESP is shown below:         IPv4 header (src=IPv4-LMAA, dst=IPv4-Proxy-CoA)           ESP header (in transport mode)             UDP header (sport=5436, dport=5436)               Mobility Header (Update Notification)                 (one or more Mobility Header options)Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   o  When using IPv6 transport, the source address in the IPv6 header      MUST be set to the local mobility anchor's IPv6 address (LMAA).      The destination address in the IPv6 header MUST be set to the      Proxy-CoA of the mobile access gateway.  The Mobility Header is      part of the IPv6 headers.   o  The format of the Update Notification message sent over IPv6 and      protected using ESP is shown below:         IPv6 header (src=LMAA, dst=Proxy-CoA)           Mobility Header (Update Notification)           ESP header (in transport mode)             (one or more Mobility Header options)5.2.  Receiving the Update Notification Acknowledgement Message   o  If the local mobility anchor does not receive an Update      Notification Acknowledgement message from the mobile access      gateway for the Update Notification message with the (A) flag set,      then the local mobility anchor MUST retransmit the message.  The      related considerations are as follows:      *  When retransmitting an Update Notification message, the         Sequence Number value and other message contents MUST be the         same as in the original message.  The (D) flag in the message         MUST be set to a value of (1).      *  There MUST be a minimum delay of         MIN_DELAY_BETWEEN_UPDATE_NOTIFICATION_REPLAY (Section 7), with         a default value of 1000 milliseconds, between two retransmit         messages.      *  The message MUST be retransmitted up to the number of times         defined by the configuration variable         MAX_UPDATE_NOTIFICATION_RETRANSMIT_COUNT (Section 7), with a         default value of (1).  If there is no Update Notification         Acknowledgement message after the retransmission count reaches         the value defined by the configuration variable         MAX_UPDATE_NOTIFICATION_RETRANSMIT_COUNT, then the message MUST         be discarded, and the event SHOULD be logged.   o  If the local mobility anchor receives a Binding Error message with      the Status field set to 2 as described in [RFC6275], this      indicates that the mobile access gateway does not support the      Update Notification message, and hence the local mobility anchor      MUST NOT send any further Update Notification messages to that      mobile access gateway unless an administrative action is taken.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   o  When receiving an Update Notification Acknowledgement message, the      local mobility anchor MUST verify the Mobility Header as described      inSection 9.2 of [RFC6275].  If the packet is dropped due to      failure of any of the Mobility Header test checks, the local      mobility anchor MUST follow the processing rules as described inSection 9.2 of [RFC6275].   o  Upon receiving the Update Notification Acknowledgement message,      the local mobility anchor MUST verify that the received message is      protected by the security association that is being used to      protect the other signaling messages between those two peers.  For      example, if the Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding      Acknowledgement messages are protected using an IPsec security      association [RFC4301], then the Update Notification      Acknowledgement message MUST have the IPsec protection with the      currently established IPsec security association that is being      used for protecting the other Proxy Mobile IPv6 signaling      messages.   o  If the local mobility anchor receives an Update Notification      Acknowledgement message with a failure status and a value of 128      or greater, then it SHOULD log an error.   o  If the Sequence Number in the received Update Notification      Acknowledgement message does not match any of the Update      Notification messages that the local mobility anchor sent, then      the message MUST be discarded, and the message should be logged.   o  If the local mobility anchor receives an Update Notification      Acknowledgement message from the mobile access gateway for an      Update Notification message that did not have the (A) flag set,      the local mobility anchor MUST process the received message in the      same way as a response to an Update Notification message with the      (A) flag set.6.  MAG Considerations6.1.  Receiving the Update Notification Message   o  When receiving an Update Notification message, the mobile access      gateway MUST verify the Mobility Header as described inSection 9.2. of [RFC6275].  If the packet is dropped due to      failure of any of the Mobility Header test checks, the mobile      access gateway MUST follow the processing rules as described inSection 9.2 of [RFC6275].Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   o  Upon receiving the Update Notification message, the mobile access      gateway MUST verify that the received packet is protected by the      security association that is being used to protect the other      signaling messages between those two peers.  For example, if the      Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding Acknowledgement messages      are protected using an IPsec security association, then the Update      Notification message MUST have the IPsec protection with the      currently established IPsec security association that is being      used for protecting the other Proxy Mobile IPv6 signaling      messages.   o  If the received Update Notification message is a retransmission of      a previously received message, as identified by the Sequence      Number, then the mobile access gateway MUST NOT handle the message      as a new request.  The (D) flag is used as an indication of a      retransmitted request, e.g., due to lost messages or the local      mobility anchor not seeing the requested update actions.  If the      mobile access gateway has not seen the (potentially lost) initial      request message, it MUST treat the received Update Notification      message (with the (D) flag set) as an initial request and continue      processing based on that.  If the mobile access gateway detects      that the request is a retransmission based on the (D) flag and the      Sequence Number, then it SHOULD redo the requested update action,      e.g., when the Acknowledgement Requested ((A)) flag is not set.      The mobile access gateway MUST always respond to the retransmitted      request if the (A) flag is set.   o  Upon accepting the Update Notification message, the mobile access      gateway MUST process the message and perform the actions based on      the Notification Reason.      *  If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the         mobile access gateway MUST send an Update Notification         Acknowledgement message with the status code field set based on         the result of processing the Update Notification message.      *  If the Notification Reason is set to a value of (1)         "FORCE-REREGISTRATION", then the mobile access gateway MUST         send a Proxy Binding Update message to the local mobility         anchor and obtain the updated session parameters for that         mobility session.      *  If the Notification Reason is set to a value of (2)         "UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS", then the mobile access gateway         MUST apply the session parameters that are obtained from the         Update Notification message in the form of mobility options.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013         However, if the mobile access gateway is unable to apply the         received session parameters, then the mobile access gateway         MUST apply the following considerations:         +  If the received Update Notification message has the (A) flag            in the message set to a value of (0), then the mobile access            gateway MUST drop the received Update Notification message            and log the error.         +  If the received Update Notification message has the (A) flag            in the message set to a value of (1), then the mobile access            gateway MUST send an Update Notification Acknowledgement            message with a status code value of 128            (FAILED-TO-UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS).      *  If the Notification Reason is set to a value of (3)         "VENDOR-SPECIFIC-REASON", then the mobile access gateway MUST         apply the considerations related to handling of the         Vendor-Specific Mobility option [RFC5094] that is carried in         the Update Notification message.  However, if there is no         Vendor-Specific Mobility option present in the message, the         mobile access gateway MUST apply the following considerations:         +  If the received Update Notification message has the (A) flag            in the message set to a value of (0), then the mobile access            gateway MUST drop the received Update Notification message            and log the error.         +  If the received Update Notification message has the (A) flag            in the message set to a value of (1), then the mobile access            gateway MUST send an Update Notification Acknowledgement            message with a status code value of 129            (MISSING-VENDOR-SPECIFIC-OPTION).      *  If the Notification Reason is set to a value of (4)         "ANI-PARAMS-REQUESTED", then the mobile access gateway MUST         send a Proxy Binding Update message to the local mobility         anchor with the Access Network Identifier option [RFC6757].         The Access Network Identifier option MUST reflect the current         access network parameters for that mobility session as known to         the mobile access gateway at the time of sending the Proxy         Binding Update message.      *  For other Notification Reason values not reserved by this         document, the processing required on the mobile access gateway         is out of scope for this document and will be specified for         each Notification Reason defined by other documents.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 14]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 20136.2.  Constructing the Update Notification Acknowledgement Message   The mobile access gateway, when sending the Update Notification   Acknowledgement message to the local mobility anchor, has to   construct the message as specified below:   o  The Sequence Number MUST be the same as the Sequence Number from      the received Update Notification message.   o  The Status field of the Update Notification message MUST be set to      a value that reflects the status of the processing of the Update      Notification request.  A value of 0 (SUCCESS) indicates that the      handling of the Update Notification message was successful.   o  The Update Notification Acknowledgement message MUST contain      either the Mobile Node Identifier option or the Mobile Node Group      Identifier option, copied from the Update Notification message.      Furthermore, the mobile access gateway MAY include other Mobility      Header options.   o  The source address in the IP header of the Update Notification      Acknowledgement message MUST be set to the destination IP address      of the received Update Notification message.   o  The destination address in the IP header of the Update      Notification Acknowledgement message MUST be set to the source      address of the received Update Notification message.   o  If IPsec ESP is used to protect signaling, the packet is processed      using transport mode ESP.   o  The format of the Update Notification Acknowledgement message sent      over IPv4 and protected using ESP is shown below:      IPv4 header (src=IPv4-Proxy-CoA, dst=IPv4-LMAA)        ESP header (in transport mode)          UDP header (sport=5436, dport=5436)            Mobility Header (Update Notification Acknowledgement)              (one or more Mobility Header options)   o  The format of the Update Notification Acknowledgement message sent      over IPv6 and protected using ESP is shown below:      IPv6 header (src=Proxy-CoA, dst=LMAA)        Mobility Header (Update Notification Acknowledgement)        ESP header (in transport mode)          (one or more Mobility Header options)Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 15]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 20137.  Protocol Configuration Variables   This specification defines the following configuration variables that   control the Update Notification feature.   The mobility entities, the local mobility anchor, and the mobile   access gateway have to allow these variables to be configured by the   system management.  The configured values for these protocol   variables have to survive server reboots and service restarts.   MAX_UPDATE_NOTIFICATION_RETRANSMIT_COUNT      This variable specifies the maximum number of times a local      mobility anchor can retransmit an Update Notification message      before it receives an Update Notification Acknowledgement message.      The default value for this parameter is 1.  The suggested range of      configured values for this variable is between 0 and 5.   MIN_DELAY_BETWEEN_UPDATE_NOTIFICATION_REPLAY      This variable specifies the minimum delay in seconds before an      Update Notification message is retransmitted.  The default value      for this parameter is 1000 milliseconds.  The suggested range of      configured values for this variable is between 500 and      5000 milliseconds.8.  Security Considerations   The Update Notification protocol described in this specification is   for use between a local mobility anchor and a mobile access gateway.   This specification defines two new Mobility Header messages: Update   Notification messages and Update Notification Acknowledgement   messages.  These Mobility Header messages are to be protected using   the same security mechanism that is used for protecting the Proxy   Mobile IPv6 signaling messages exchanged between a given local   mobility anchor and mobile access gateway.   If IPsec is used, the IPsec security association that is used for   protecting the Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding Acknowledgement   also needs to be used for protecting Update Notification and Update   Notification Acknowledgement messages.  A Proxy Mobile IPv6   implementation and the IPsec layer are typically able to communicate   with each other through an implementation-specific interface, for   example, to exchange configuration and notification information.   The traffic selectors associated with the Security Policy Database   (SPD) entry for protecting Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding   Acknowledgement messages (Section 4.2 of [RFC5213]) have to beKrishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 16]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   extended to include the Mobility Header Type values 19 and 20, which   have been allocated for Update Notification and Update Notification   Acknowledgement messages, respectively.  Furthermore, any time there   is rekeying of the IPsec security association between the mobile   access gateway and the local mobility anchor, the newly established   IPsec security association will be used for protecting the Update   Notification and Update Notification Acknowledgement messages.9.  Acknowledgements   The authors would like to thank Basavaraj Patil, Rajeev Koodli,   Lionel Morand, Itsuma Tanaka, Rajesh Pazhyannur, Carlos Jesus   Bernardos Cano, John Kaippallimalil, Brian Haberman, and other   members of the NETEXT working group for all the comments and   discussions on the document.   The authors would like to thank Barry Leiba, Robert Sparks, Carlos   Pignataro, Benoit Claise, Stephen Farrell, and Jari Arkko for their   inputs to the document as part of the IESG review process.10.  IANA Considerations   IANA has taken the following actions.   o  This specification defines a new Mobility Header Type message,      Update Notification.  This Mobility Header message is described inSection 4.1.  The type value 19 for this message has been      allocated from the "Mobility Header Types - for the MH Type field      in the Mobility Header" registry at      <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters>.   o  This specification defines a new Mobility Header Type message,      Update Notification Acknowledgement.  This Mobility Header message      is described inSection 4.2.  The type value 20 for this message      has been allocated from the "Mobility Header Types - for the MH      Type field in the Mobility Header" registry at      <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters>.   o  This specification defines a new registry for Notification      Reasons.  It is called the "Update Notification Reasons Registry".      This registry has been created under the "Mobile IPv6 Parameters"      registry at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters>.      The Notification Reason is a field in the Update Notification      message (Section 4.1).  The number space for the Notification      Reason field needs to be managed by IANA, under the "Update      Notification Reason Registry".  This specification reserves the      following type values.  The allocation policy for this field is      "Specification Required" [RFC5226].Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 17]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013         +=====+===========================+====================+         |Value|       Description         |     Reference      |         +=====+===========================+====================+         | 0   | Reserved                  |     [RFC7077]      |         +=====+================================================+         | 1   | FORCE-REREGISTRATION      |     [RFC7077]      |         +=====+================================================+         | 2   | UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS |     [RFC7077]      |         +=====+================================================+         | 3   | VENDOR-SPECIFIC-REASON    |     [RFC7077]      |         +=====+================================================+         | 4   | ANI-PARAMS-REQUESTED      |     [RFC7077]      |         +=====+================================================+         |255  | Reserved                  |     [RFC7077]      |         +=====+================================================+   o  This specification defines a new registry for Status.  It is      called the "Update Notification Acknowledgement Status Registry".      This registry has been created under the "Mobile IPv6 Parameters"      registry at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters>.      The status is a field in the Update Notification Acknowledgement      message (Section 4.2).  The number space for the Status field      needs to be managed by IANA, under the "Update Notification      Acknowledgement Status Registry".  This specification reserves the      following type values.  The allocation policy for this field is      "Specification Required".  Status codes between 0 and 127 signify      successful processing of the Update Notification message, and      codes between 128 and 255 signify that an error occurred during      processing of the Update Notification message.         +=====+=====================================+=============+         |Value|       Description                   |  Reference  |         +=====+=====================================+=============+         | 0   | SUCCESS                             |  [RFC7077]  |         +=====+=====================================+=============+         |128  | FAILED-TO-UPDATE-SESSION-PARAMETERS |  [RFC7077]  |         +=====+=====================================+=============+         |129  | MISSING-VENDOR-SPECIFIC-OPTION      |  [RFC7077]  |         +=====+=====================================+=============+Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 18]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 201311.  References11.1.  Normative References   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.   [RFC4283]  Patel, A., Leung, K., Khalil, M., Akhtar, H., and K.              Chowdhury, "Mobile Node Identifier Option for Mobile IPv6              (MIPv6)",RFC 4283, November 2005.   [RFC5094]  Devarapalli, V., Patel, A., and K. Leung, "Mobile IPv6              Vendor Specific Option",RFC 5094, December 2007.   [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,              and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6",RFC 5213, August 2008.   [RFC5844]  Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy              Mobile IPv6",RFC 5844, May 2010.   [RFC6275]  Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support              in IPv6",RFC 6275, July 2011.   [RFC6602]  Abinader, F., Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Krishnan, S., and              D. Premec, "Bulk Binding Update Support for Proxy Mobile              IPv6",RFC 6602, May 2012.11.2.  Informative References   [PMIPv6-FLOW-MOB]              Bernardos, CJ., Ed., "Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to              Support Flow Mobility", Work in Progress, October 2013.   [PMIPv6-QoS]              Liebsch, M., Seite, P., Yokota, H., Korhonen, J., and S.              Gundavelli, "Quality of Service Option for Proxy Mobile              IPv6", Work in Progress, November 2013.   [RFC4301]  Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the              Internet Protocol",RFC 4301, December 2005.   [RFC4303]  Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)",RFC4303, December 2005.   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs",BCP 26,RFC 5226,              May 2008.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 19]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013   [RFC5846]  Muhanna, A., Khalil, M., Gundavelli, S., Chowdhury, K.,              and P. Yegani, "Binding Revocation for IPv6 Mobility",RFC5846, June 2010.   [RFC5847]  Devarapalli, V., Koodli, R., Lim, H., Kant, N., Krishnan,              S., and J. Laganier, "Heartbeat Mechanism for Proxy Mobile              IPv6",RFC 5847, June 2010.   [RFC6757]  Gundavelli, S., Korhonen, J., Grayson, M., Leung, K., and              R. Pazhyannur, "Access Network Identifier (ANI) Option for              Proxy Mobile IPv6",RFC 6757, October 2012.   [RFC6909]  Gundavelli, S., Zhou, X., Korhonen, J., Feige, G., and R.              Koodli, "IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy              Mobile IPv6",RFC 6909, April 2013.Krishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 20]

RFC 7077                  Update Notifications             November 2013Authors' Addresses   Suresh Krishnan   Ericsson   8400 Blvd Decarie   Town of Mount Royal, Quebec   Canada   Phone: +1 514 345 7900 x42871   EMail: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com   Sri Gundavelli   Cisco   170 West Tasman Drive   San Jose, CA  95134   USA   EMail: sgundave@cisco.com   Marco Liebsch   NEC   Kurfuersten-Anlage 36   D-69115 Heidelberg   Germany   EMail: marco.liebsch@neclab.eu   Hidetoshi Yokota   KDDI   EMail: yokota@kddilabs.jp   Jouni Korhonen   Broadcom   Porkkalankatu 24   Helsinki  FIN-00180   Finland   EMail: jouni.nospam@gmail.comKrishnan, et al.             Standards Track                   [Page 21]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp