Distributed Mobility Anchoring
draft-seite-dmm-dma-07
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Pierrick Seite , Philippe Bertin , Jong-Hyouk Lee | ||
| Last updated | 2014-08-10 (Latest revision 2014-02-06) | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
Most existing IP mobility solutions are derived from Mobile IP principles where a given mobility anchor maintains Mobile Nodes (MNs) binding up-to-date. Data traffic is then encapsulated between the mobility anchor and the MN or its Access Router. These approaches are usually implemented on a centralised architectures where both MN context and traffic encapsulation need to be processed at a central network entity, i.e. the mobility anchor. However, one of the trend in mobile network evolution is to "flatten" mobility architecture by confining mobility support in the access network, e.g. at the access routers level, keeping the rest of the network unaware of the mobility events and their support. This document discusses the deployment of legay Proxy Mobile IP approach in such a flat architecture. The solution allows to dynamically distribute mobility functions among access routers for an optimal routing management. The goal is also to dynamically adapt the mobility support of the MN's needs by applying traffic redirection only to MNs' flows when an IP handover occurs.
Authors
Pierrick Seite
Philippe Bertin
Jong-Hyouk Lee
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)