Skip to main content

Address Selection for DMM
draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
Authors Dapeng Liu , DENG Hui
Last updated 2012-03-05
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00
Distributed Mobility Managment Working                            D. Liu
Group                                                            H. Deng
Internet-Draft                                              China Mobile
Intended status: Standards Track                           March 5, 2012
Expires: September 6, 2012

                       Address Selection for DMM
                   draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00

Abstract

   In DMM scenario, it is possible for the MN to have multiple mobility
   anchor points and corresponding prefixes.  In that case, MN needs to
   know the type of the addresses then it can select the right one for
   application to use.  This document describes a mechnism to extend RA
   message to carry a flag which can be used to identify the nature of
   the prefix.

   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 in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Liu & Deng              Expires September 6, 2012               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft     draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00         March 2012

   (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 Contents

   1.  Problem of address selection for DMM  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Extension to Router Advertisment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  Mobile Node Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Liu & Deng              Expires September 6, 2012               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft     draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00         March 2012

1.  Problem of address selection for DMM

   As draft-liu-dmm-dynamic-anchor-discussion-00 introduced, there is a
   address selection problem for DMM dynamic anchor solution.  The
   difficulty of this problem is: the MN does not know the difference
   between the multiple prefixes.  There is no way for the network to
   tell the MN the nature of the different prefixes and there is no
   standard mechnism for the MN to select the right prefix.

2.  Extension to Router Advertisment

   Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] extend IPv6 router advertisement message for
   movement detection and home agent information broadcasting.  This
   document proposes to further extend the IPv6 router advertisement
   message to carry a flag to identify the nature of the prefix that it
   is advertising.

                   +----------+---------+-------------------+
                   |  Type    |  Code   |     Checksum      |
                   +----------+-+-+-+---+-------------------+
                   |Hop Limit |M|O|H|Re-|    Router Lifetime|
                   +----------+-+-+-+---+-------------------+
                   |          Reachable Time                |
                   +----------------------------------------+
                   |          Retrans Timer                 |
                   +----------------------------------------+
                   |          Options                       |
                   +----------------------------------------+

   The H bit is used for indentify that the router advertisment is sent
   by a home agent.

             +-------------+------------+------------+-+-+-+--+---+
             |    Type     |    Length  |PrefixLength|L|A|R|T |R- |
             +-------------+------------+------------+-+-+-+--+---+
             |                 Valid Lifetime                     |
             +----------------------------------------------------+
             |                 Preferred Lifetime                 |
             +----------------------------------------------------+
             |                 Reserved                           |
             +----------------------------------------------------+
             |                                                    |
             |                 Prefix                             |
             +----------------------------------------------------+

Liu & Deng              Expires September 6, 2012               [Page 3]
Internet-Draft     draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00         March 2012

   This document proposes to extend the prefix information option to add
   a 'T' flag, its definition is as follows:

   T (Type):

   Type flag.  This is a 2 bits flag indentifies the types of the
   advertising prefix.  The value of this flag could be:

   00: Local home network prefix.  It means that this prefix is
   allocated and advertised by current router which the MN attaches to.

   01 : Remote home network prefix.  It means that this prefix is
   allocated by another router instead of the router that the MN
   currently attaches to.

   10: Reserved.

   11: Reserved.

   The mechanism that used for the router to identify the types of the
   prefix is out the scope of this document.  As an example, the router
   can query the policy server to know which router allocates a
   particular prefix.

3.  Mobile Node Operation

   The mobile node knows the types of the prefixes from the T flag of
   the router advertisment message.  The applications on the mobile node
   can use this information to select the right IP address.  For
   example, for on-going session, application always choose to use the
   prefix that it used before it handovers to a new location.  For the
   newly initiate application, it will use the prefix that allocated by
   current router, e.g. local home network prefix.  The mobile node can
   use advanced socket API to select the proper prefix, for example,
   extension to RFC 5014.The detail mechnism is out the scope of this
   document.

4.  IANA Considerations

   This document makes no request of IANA.

   Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
   RFC.

Liu & Deng              Expires September 6, 2012               [Page 4]
Internet-Draft     draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00         March 2012

5.  Security Considerations

   TBD

6.  Acknowledgements

   TBD

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.draft-seite-dmm-dma-00]
              "Distributed Mobility Anchoring", February 2012.

Authors' Addresses

   Dapeng Liu
   China Mobile
   32 Xuanwumen West Street
   Beijng, Xicheng District  100053
   China

   Phone: +86-13911788933
   Email: liudapeng@chinamobile.com

   Hui Deng
   China Mobile
   32 Xuanwumen West Street
   Beijng, Xicheng District  100053
   China

   Phone:
   Fax:
   Email: denghui@chinamobile.com
   URI:

Liu & Deng              Expires September 6, 2012               [Page 5]