MULTIMOB Group H. Deng
Internet-Draft Gang. Chen
Intended status: Informational China Mobile
Expires: January 14, 2010 T. Schmidt
HAW Hamburg
P. Seite
France Telecom
P. Yang
Hitachi
July 13, 2009
Multicast Support Requirements for Proxy Mobile IPv6
draft-deng-multimob-pmip6-requirement-02
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material
from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly
available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the
copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF
Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the
IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from
the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this
document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and
derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards
Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to
translate it into languages other than English.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
Abstract
This document summarizes requirements for multicast listener support
in Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) scenarios. In correspondance to
PMIPv6, multicast mobility management requirements do not request any
active participation of the mobile node.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Scenarios of Multicast Support for PMIPv6 . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Requirements for multicast support in PMIPv6 . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. Basic functional requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Multicast performance requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Architecture requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. LMA Requirements for multicast support in PMIPv6 . . . . . 9
4.2. MAG Requirements for multicast support in PMIPv6 . . . . . 9
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
1. Introduction
Many of the current mobile network architectures as well as link
layer technologies provide an independent multicast/broadcast support
for dedicated group communication services, e.g., based on specific
wireless channels. Typically, applications like Internet IPTV, that
require voluminous content streams to be distributed to potentially
large numbers of receivers, may take benefit of this transport mode.
At the same time, with the development of mobile Internet protocols,
the need emerged for a seamlessly available multicast solution that
makes efficient use of the multipoint transmission technologies
deployed by operators [MMCASTv6-PS].
As an example, mobile IPTV channels, which combine Audio/Video
programs with interactive data for supplementary information (using
bi-directional wireless broadband links), and with potential large
audience, may take particular advantage of any multicast/ broadcast
mobile support at access networks for downlink distribution of A/V
streams.
Among IP mobility management protocols, Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6)
[RFC5213] has been designed to bring IP mobility making the mobile
nodes unaware of network layer changes. Functional entities in the
PMIPv6 infrastructure are the Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) and the
Mobile Access Gateway (MAG). The local mobility anchor is
responsible for maintaining the mobile node's reachability state and
is the topological anchor point for the mobile node's home network
prefix(es). The mobile access gateway performs mobility management
operations on behalf of the mobile node. Basically, the mobile
access gateway is responsible for detecting the mobile node's
movements, to and from the access link, and for initiating binding
registrations (i.e. location updates) to the mobile node's local
mobility anchor.
The current PMIPv6 specification lacks dedicated support of group
communication. To facilitate design of a multicast support in future
solutions, this document gathers requirements for multicast listener
support. In correspondance to PMIPv6, multicast mobility management
requirements should not request any active participation of the
mobile multicast recipient.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
2. Scenarios of Multicast Support for PMIPv6
According to [RFC5213], two basic routing scenarios exist in PMIPv6:
the tunneling mode and local routing. The tunneling mode as
displayed in Figure 1 uses IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation [RFC2473]
(IPv6-in-IPv4 in [PMIPv6v4]) to transfer data between LMA and MAG.
Thus two entities are facing an avalanche problem (cf.
[MMCASTv6-PS]), the LMA in feeding multicast streams to the MAGs, and
the MAG in distributing multicast on air to the mobile nodes.
+-------------+
| Content |
| Source |
+-------------+
|
*** *** *** ***
* ** ** ** *
* *
* Fixed Internet *
* *
* ** ** ** *
*** *** *** ***
/ \
+----+ +----+
|LMA1| |LMA2|
+----+ +----+
LMAA1 | | LMAA2
| |
\\ //\\
\\ // \\
\\ // \\
Unicast Tunnels --> \\ // \\
\\ // \\
\\ // \\
Proxy-CoA1 || || Proxy-CoA2
+----+ +----+
|MAG1| |MAG2|
+----+ +----+
| | |
| | |
MN1 MN2 MN3
Figure 1: Multicast Scenario in PMIPv6 Tunneling Mode
The local routing option has been designed to support direct node to
node communication within a PMIPv6 domain. Assuming a locally
available content source, the local routing mode may give rise to the
scenario visualized in Figure 2. Local routing will resolve tunnel
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
convergence issues at the LMA but not the avalanche problem point to
the MAG.
+----+ +----+
|LMA1| |LMA2|
+----+ +----+
LMAA1 | | LMAA2
| |
*** *** *** ***
* ** ** ** *
* * +-------------+
* Local Routing * _____ | Content |
* * | Source |
* ** ** ** * +-------------+
*** *** *** ***
Proxy-CoA1 || || Proxy-CoA2
+----+ +----+
|MAG1| |MAG2|
+----+ +----+
| | |
| | |
MN1 MN2 MN3
Figure 2: Multicast Scenario for PMIPv6 Local Routing
PMIP multicast support must clearly address above issues but should
also bring good user experience of multicast mobility. In addition,
it is expected that the solution shall inherit from the basics of
PMIP scenarios; in particular mobility management should not require
to add specific functions to the IPv6 node. In these perspectives,
following sections summarize protocol and architecture requirements
for multicast support in Proxy Mobile IPv6.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
3. Requirements for multicast support in PMIPv6
This section summarizes the requirements for mobile multicast
protocol extensions of PMIPv6.
3.1. Basic functional requirements
R1 - PMIPv6 multicast mobility management MUST transparently support
the reception of Any Source Multicast (ASM) or Source Specific
Multicast (SSM) channels.
R2 - The mobile node is responsible for initially subscribing to the
multicast group(s).
R3 - The mobile node MAY remain agnostic of the multicast mobility
management when roaming. In particular, the node MUST not be
required to re-subscribe to multicast group(s) after handoff.
R4 - Multicast packet distribution within a PMIPv6 domain MUST not
cause MTU-size conflicts on the network layer. In particular, path
MTU discovery MUST NOT be required for multicast transmission.
R5 - PMIPv6 multicast mobility management MUST comply with multicast
scoping rules and restrictions.
R6 - PMIPv6 multicast mobility management MUST equally cover IPv6/
IPv4 only and dual stack nodes.
R7 - A multicast solution MUST be compatible with the existing PMIPv6
network architecture and protocol structure such as multihoming and
vertical handover.
3.2. Multicast performance requirements
R8 - PMIPv6 transmission SHOULD realize native multicast forwarding,
and where applicable conserve network resources and utilize link
layer multipoint distribution to avoid data redundancy.
R9 - The solution MUST minimize multicast forwarding delays to
provide seamless and fast handovers for real-time services. After a
handoff, multicast data SHOULD continue to reach the mobile listener
at a latency similar to unicast communication.
R10 - The PMIPv6 multicast mobility management SHOULD avoid to cause
packet loss in addition to unicast handoff.
R11 - Multicast mobility SHOULD minimize transport costs on the
forwarding link, as well as any additional overhead on the multicast
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
delivery path.
R12 - Routing convergence MUST be ensured, even when the MN moves
rapidly and performs handovers at a high frequency.
R13 - The protocol MUST be robust against irregular moves of the MN
(e.g. ping-pong mobility) and MUST not compromise (unicast) network
performance.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
4. Architecture requirements
In addition to protocol requirements as listed in the preceeding
section, mobile multicast support for listeners MAY lead to
requirement on the PMIPv6 architectural entities. These potential
issues are sketched in the following sub-sections:
4.1. LMA Requirements for multicast support in PMIPv6
Multicast Bandwidth Control: LMA should be able to control the total
bandwidth of a user port that can be used for multicast service,
thereby monitoring the fraction of the total bandwidth consumed by
multicast. This requirement may lead to support a range of different
service classes with various QoS requirements.
Multicast AAA control: AAA functions MAY resident at the LMA, in
particular admission control and accounting, MAY be preserved and
applicable under multicast services.
Multicast forwarding: LMA could forward the multicast through unicast
IPv6 header between MN-HoA and LMA.
4.2. MAG Requirements for multicast support in PMIPv6
It is foreseeable that the MAG has to act as a multicast designated
router. Hence support of MLDv2 [RFC3810] or LW-MLDv2 is MAY be
required at the MAG.
Further MAG-specific requirements can be identified:
Access Control: it is required that Access Control based on available
resources is supported at the MAG.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
5. Security Considerations
Multicast security is one of the most crucial issues in mobile
multicast service such that it is required to provide security
capabilities to protect mobile multicast network from any malicious
attempts caused by multicast security holes such as denial of service
attacks.
- The multicast service in PMIPv6 should not degrade the security
protection of the basic PMIPv6 AAA mechanism.
- Multicast system architecture is required to provide an admission
control mechanism to regulate any multicast events.
- Multicast system architecture is required to be independent of
adjacent domains such that it shall not affect the adjacent multicast
domain without permission.
- Multicast system architecture is required to provide a mechanism to
check integrity of multicast sources prior to service delivery such
that it prevents unauthorized source to distribute multicast content.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
6. IANA Considerations
This document makes no requests to IANA.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
7. Contributors
This document is a result of discussions in the multicast support for
PMIPv6 design team. The members of the design team that are listed
below are authors that have contributed to this document:
Pierrick Seite
pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com
Peny Yang
pyang@hitachi.cn
Von-Hugo, Dirk
Dirk.Hugo@t-systems.com
Hitoshi Asaeda
asaeda@sfc.wide.ad.jp
Thomas C. Schmidt
schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de
Suresh Krishnan
suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com
John Zhao
john.zhao@huawei.com
Matthias Waehlisch
mw@link-lab.net
Hui Deng
denghui@chinamobile.com
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2473] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in
IPv6 Specification", RFC 2473, December 1998.
[RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery
Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004.
[RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.
8.2. Informative References
[MMCASTv6-PS]
Schmidt, T., Waehlisch, M., and G. Fairhurst, "Multicast
Mobility in MIPv6: Problem Statement and Brief Survey",
draft-irtf-mobopts-mmcastv6-ps-07 (work in progress),
April 2009.
[PMIPv6v4]
Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-13
(work in progress), June 2009.
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
Authors' Addresses
Hui Deng (Editor)
China Mobile
53A,Xibianmennei Ave.,
Xuanwu District,
Beijing 100053
China
Email: denghui02@gmail.com
Gang Chen (Editor)
China Mobile
53A,Xibianmennei Ave.,
Xuanwu District,
Beijing 100053
China
Email: chengang@chinamobile.com
Thomas C. Schmidt (Editor)
HAW Hamburg
Dept. Informatik
Berliner Tor 7
Hamburg, D-20099
Germany
Email: Schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de
Pierrick Seite (Editor)
France Telecom
4, rue du Clos Courtel
BP 91226
Cesson-Sevigne, 35512
France
Email: pierrick.seite@orange-ftgroup.com
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Multicast Requirements for PMIPv6 July 2009
Peng Yang (Editor)
Hitachi
301, North Wing, Tower C Raycom Infotech Park
2 kexueyuan Nanlu
Haidian District
Beijing, 100080
P.R. China
Phone: +861082862918(ext.)328
Email: pyang@hitachi.cn
Deng, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 15]