Mobility Ability Negotiation
draft-yan-dmm-man-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2016-12-21
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
DMM Working Group                                                 Z. Yan
Internet-Draft                                                     CNNIC
Intended status: Standards Track                                  J. Lee
Expires: June 24, 2017                              Sangmyung University
                                                       December 21, 2016

                      Mobility Ability Negotiation
                          draft-yan-dmm-man-00

Abstract

   Based on IPv6, multiple mobility management protocols have been
   developed and generally they can be classified into two types:
   network-based and host-based.  Different protocols have different
   functional requirements on the network element or the terminal and
   then a scheme should be used in order to support the negotiation and
   selection of adopted mobility management protocol when a terminal
   accesses to a new network.  In this draft, this issue is considered
   and analyzed.

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 June 24, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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
   (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

Yan & Lee                 Expires June 24, 2017                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                     MAN                     December 2016

   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.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Possible solutions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   As the Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) [RFC6275] protocol standardization suite,
   there are multiple extension protocols have been standardized.  These
   protocols can be classified into two types: protocols for the
   function extension and protocols for the performance enhancement.
   The protocols for the function extension is proposed to support some
   specific scenarios or functions, such as: Dual-stack Mobile IPv6
   (DSMIPv6) [RFC5555] for mobility of the dual-stack nodes, Multiple
   Care-of-address (MCoA) [RFC5648] for mobile nodes of multi-interface
   and Network Mobility (NEMO) [RFC3963] for mobility of sub-network.
   The other type is proposed to enhance the performance of the mobility
   management, such as Fast Mobile IPv6 (FMIP6) [RFC5268] for fast
   handover, Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (HMIPv6) [RFC5380] for
   hierarchical mobility optimization.  MIPv6 and these extensions are
   called host-based mobility management protocols because the location
   update is initiated by the terminal and the tunnel is terminated at
   the terminal.

   In order to reduce the protocol cost and enhance the handover
   performance further, the network-based mobility management schemes
   were proposed and Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) [RFC5213] was
   standardized as a basis.  Based on PMIPv6, a series of its extensions
   were proposed, such as Dual-stack Proxy Mobile IPv6 (DS-PMIPv6)
   [RFC5844], Distributed Mobility Management Proxy Mobile IPv6 (DMM-
   PMIPv6) [RFC7333] and so on.  Be different from the host-based
   schemes, the location update in PMIPv6 is triggered by the network
   entity and the tunnel is established between network entities.  And
Show full document text