INTERNET-DRAFT                                  Karim El Malki, Ericsson
                                                 Hesham Soliman, Flarion
Expires: December 2003


                                                              May 2003


           Simultaneous Bindings for Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers
               <draft-elmalki-mobileip-bicasting-v6-03.txt>


Status of this memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026.

   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 cite them other than as "work in progress".

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/lid-abstracts.txt

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This document is an individual submission to the IETF.


Abstract

   Fast Handover for Mobile IPv6 [1] and describes protocols that
   minimise the amount of service disruption when performing layer-3
   handovers. This draft extends the Fast Handover protocol with a
   simultaneous bindings function and the BETH capabilities with a
   bicasting function to minimise packet loss at the MN. Traffic for the
   MN is therefore bicast or n-cast for a short period to its current
   location and to one or more locations where the MN is expected to
   move to shortly. This removes the timing ambiguity regarding when to
   start sending traffic for the MN to its new point of attachment
   following a Fast Handover and allows the decoupling of layer-2 and
   layer-3 handovers. It also saves the MN periods of service disruption
   in the case of ping-pong movement.




El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 1]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003



TABLE OF CONTENTS

   1. Introduction.....................................................2
   1.1 Terminology.....................................................3

   2. Simultaneous Bindings............................................3

   3. Fast Handovers in Mobile IPv6....................................4

   4. Link layer assisted handovers....................................5

   5. Decoupling L3 Handovers from L2 handovers using Simultaneous
   Bindings            6

   6. Avoiding service disruption due to ping-pong movement............7

   7. Changes to the Fast Handover and BETH Operations.................7
   7.1 MN Operation....................................................7
   7.1 HA/MAP/AR Operation.............................................8

   8. Simultaneous Bindings Flag in Fast Binding Update (F-BU) message.8

   9. Simultaneous Bindings suboption for Fast Binding Acknowledgement.9
   (F-BA) message......................................................9

   10. Multiple copies of packets received at AR.......................9

   11. Reception of multiple copies in the MN.........................10

   12. References.....................................................10

   13. AuthorsÆ Addresses.............................................11

   14. Full Copyright Statement.......................................11


1. Introduction

   Fast Handover for Mobile IPv6 (FMIPv6) describes a protocol to
   minimise the amount of service disruption when performing layer-3
   handovers. This draft extends the Fast Handover protocol with a
   simultaneous bindings function to minimise packet loss at the MN.
   Traffic for the MN is therefore bicast or n-cast for a short period
   to its current location and to one or more locations where the MN is
   expected to move to shortly. This removes the timing ambiguity
   regarding when to start sending traffic for the MN to its new point
   of attachment following a Fast Handover and allows the decoupling of
   layer-2 and layer-3 handovers. It also saves the MN periods of
   service disruption in the case of ping-pong movement. Appendix A




El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 2]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   contains some calculations illustrating how to achieve zero service
   disruption at L3 using FMIPv6 and bicasting.


1.1 Terminology

   This section presents a few terms used throughout the document.

      PAR û Previous Access Router.

      NAR - New Access Router.

      L2 handover - Movement of a MN's point of Layer 2 (L2)
         connection from one wireless access point to another.

      L3 handover - Movement of a MN between ARs which involves
         changing the on-link care-of address at Layer 3 (L3).

      L2 trigger - Information from L2 that informs L3 of particular
         events before and after L2 handover. The descriptions of L2
         triggers in this document are not specific to any particular
         L2, but rather represent generalizations of L2 information
         available from a wide variety of L2 protocols.

      Bicasting/n-casting - The splitting of a stream of packets
         destined for a MN into two or more streams, and the
         simultaneous transmission of the streams to PAR and one or
         more NARs. N/casting is a technique used to reduce packet
         loss during handover.

      ping-ponging - Rapid back and forth movement between two
         wireless access points due to failure of L2 handover. Ping-
         ponging can occur if radio conditions for both the old and
         new access points are about equivalent and less than optimal
         for establishing a good, low error L2 connection.

2. Simultaneous Bindings

   Simultaneous bindings were built into the Mobile IPv4 protocol [2].
   To enable multiple simultaneous bindings using Mobile IPv4 the MN
   simply sends the first normal Registration Request for a care-of
   address and then sends other Registration messages for another set of
   care-of addresses having the æSÆ bit set. The receiver of the
   Registration Requests (e.g. the HA) will then maintain all these
   care-of address bindings for the MN contemporarily rather than only
   servicing the MN at the care-of address in its most recent
   Registration Request (which would be the case had the æSÆ bit not
   been set). This results in bicasting or n-casting of packets to all
   the care-of addresses. This draft extends the Mobile IPv6 protocol
   with similar functionality and describes a new Simultaneous Bindings
   flag for the Fast Binding Update in [1].



El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 3]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003



   Multiple simultaneous bindings and bicasting can be an important tool
   to decouple L3 handovers from L2 handovers and to reduce packet loss.
   In [1] this mechanism instructs the recipient of the F-BU with the
   simultaneous bindings flag to make multiple copies of packets
   destined to the MN and send them to multiple MN care-of addresses
   before the MN actually moves there. This allows a smoothing of the L3
   handover, meaning that packet loss is minimised or even eliminated.
   Simultaneous bindings are also useful to prevent service disruption
   due to ping-ponging as described later.

3. Fast Handovers in Mobile IPv6

   The mechanism to obtain fast L3 handovers for Mobile IPv6 is
   described in [1] and illustrated in Figure 1. This mechanism involves
   the use of L2 triggers which allow the L3 handover to be anticipated
   rather than being performed after the L2 handover completion as
   normal. Fast Handovers are required to ensure that the layer 3
   (Mobile IP) handover delay is minimised, thus also minimising and
   possibly eliminating the period of service disruption which normally
   occurs when a MN moves between two ARs. This period of service
   disruption usually occurs due to the time required by the MN to
   update its HA after it moves between ARs. During this time period the
   MN cannot resume or continue communications. Following is a short
   summary of the Fast Handover mechanism described in [1].


                     +-----------+  1a. HI          +-----+
                     |           | ---------------->| NAR |
                     |    PAR    |  1b. HAck        |     |
                     +-----------+ <----------------+-----+
                     ^  |        ^
       (2a. RtSolPr) |  | 2b     |
                     |  | Pr     | 3. Fast BU (F-BU)
                     |  | RtAdv  | 4. Fast BA  (F-BACK)
                     |  v        v
                     +------------+
                     |     MN     |
                     +------------+    - - - - - ->
                                       Movement

                    Figure 1 û Fast MIPv6 Handover Protocol

   While the MN is connected to its Previous Access Router (PAR) and is
   about to move to a New Access Router (NAR), the Fast Handovers in
   Mobile IPv6 requires:

   - the MN to obtain a new care-of address at the NAR while connected
   to the PAR the MN to send a BU to its old anchor point (e.g. PAR) to
   update its binding cache with the MNÆs new care-of address.




El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 4]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   - the old anchor point (e.g. PAR) to start forwarding packets
   destined for the MN to NAR.

   The MN or PAR may initiate the Fast Handover procedure by using
   wireless link-layer information or link-layer ôtriggersö which inform
   that the MN will soon be handed off between two wireless access
   points respectively attached to PAR and NAR. If the ôtriggerö is
   received at the MN, the MN will initiate the layer-3 handover process
   by sending a Proxy Router Solicitation message to PAR. Instead if the
   ôtriggerö is received at PAR then it will transmit a Proxy Router
   Advertisement to the appropriate MN, without the need for
   solicitations.

   The MN obtains a new care-of address while connected to PAR by means
   of router advertisements containing information from the NAR (Proxy
   Router Advertisement, PrRtAdv, which may be sent due to a Proxy
   Router Solicitation, RtSolPr).  The PAR will validate the MNÆs new
   COA by sending a Handover Initiate (HI) message to the NAR. Based on
   the response generated in the Handover Acknowledge (HAck) message,
   the PAR will either generate a tunnel to the MNÆs new COA (if the
   address was valid) or generate a tunnel to the NARÆs address (if the
   address was already in use on the new subnet). If the address was
   already in use on the new subnet, the NAR will generate a host route
   for the MN using its old COA. The new COA sent in the HI message is
   formed by appending the MNÆs ôcurrentö interface identifier to the
   NARÆs prefix. Note that the HI/HAck exchange is decoupled from the
   handover procedure and should be performed in advance so as not to
   add latency to the protocol exchange.

4. Link layer assisted Fast handovers

   The following figure is taken from [1].

                         +------+   HRqst  +------+
                          | PAR  |<-------->| NAR  |
                          +------+   HRply  +------+
                             ^                  ^
                     old L2  |                  |  new L2
                             +-------+    +-----+
                                     |    |
                                     |    |
                                     V    V
                                    +------+  movement
                                    |  MN  | --------->
                                    +------+

                          Figure 2 û Link layer assisted Handovers


   Figure 2 describes a way to implement fast handovers without
   involving messages from the MN. Upon receipt of L2 triggers, which



El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 5]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   communicate the upcoming movement of a MN between two ARs, the PAR
   will establish a bidirectional tunnel between itself and the NAR (or
   vice versa). As soon as the PAR detects that the MN has disconnected
   as described in [1], the PAR will start forwarding traffic it
   receives for the MN over to NAR. In the opposite direction the NAR
   will reverse tunnel traffic sent by the MN on its new link back to
   PAR.

5. Decoupling L3 Handovers from L2 handovers using Simultaneous Bindings

   The mechanisms described in [1] allow the anticipation of the layer 3
   handover such that data traffic can be redirected to the MNÆs new
   location before it moves there. However it is not simple to determine
   the correct time to start forwarding between PAR and NAR, which has
   an impact on how smooth the handover will be. Packet loss will occur
   if this is performed too late or too early with respect to the time
   in which the MN detaches from PAR and attaches to NAR. Also, some
   measure is needed to support the case in which the MN moves quickly
   back-and-forth between ARs (ping-pong).

   In many wireless networks it is not possible to know in advance
   precisely when a MN will detach from the wireless link to PAR and
   attach to the one connected to NAR. Therefore determining the time
   when to start forwarding packets between PAR and NAR is not possible.
   Certain wireless technologies involve layer-2 messages which instruct
   the MN to handover immediately or simply identify that the MN has
   already detached/attached. Even if the ARs could extract this
   information, there may not be sufficient time for the PAR to detect
   the MNÆs detachment and start getting packets tunnelled over to NAR
   before the MN attached to NAR. This is because wireless layer-2
   handover times are quite small (i.e. range from 10Æs to 100Æs ms).
   Thus a period of service disruption may occur due to this timing
   uncertainty unless further enhancements are made to the handover
   mechanism. If the L3 handover is anticipated and the PAR starts
   forwarding data to NAR upon receipt of the Fast BU in [1] or upon
   receipt of the L2-LD trigger in the link-layer assisted case, then
   the period of service disruption will be according to the following:

   A = L3 handover anticipation (time difference between the start of
   the
       L3 fast handover and the moment in which the L2 handover occurs)
   h = L2 handover time (disconnection time due to L2 handover)

   Approximate period before MN receives packets again = A + h

   It is therefore necessary to decouple layer-3 handover timing from
   layer-2 handover timing. One solution is to bicast or n-cast packets
   destined to the MN for a short period from the old anchor point (e.g.
   PAR) to one or more potential future MN locations (e.g. NAR/s) before
   the MN actually moves there. This means that the handover procedure
   described previously would be enhanced by having the old anchor point



El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 6]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   (e.g. PAR) send one copy of packets to the MNÆs old on-link care-of
   address and another copy of the packets to the MNÆs new care-of
   address (or addresses) connected to NAR. The MN is thus able to
   receive traffic independently of the exact layer-2 handover timing
   during the handover period.

6. Avoiding service disruption due to ping-pong movement

   It is possible that the layer-2 handover procedure may fail or
   terminate abruptly in wireless systems. Therefore a MN which expects
   to move between PAR and NAR may unexpectedly never complete the
   layer-2 handover and find itself connected to PAR. Another undesired
   effect is that the MN could ping-pong between ARs due to layer-2
   mobility issues. Both these cases would leave the MN unable to resume
   communication and have to transmit a new F-BU in [1] or wait for a
   new bidirectional tunnel setup in the link-layer assisted case before
   resuming communications.

   This may be solved through the use of simultaneous bindings which
   allow the MN to maintain layer-3 connectivity with the PAR during the
   affected handover period, thus smoothing the handover. This
   eliminates the need for continuous transmission of Fast Binding
   Updates in [1] or continuous bidirectional tunnel setups in the link-
   layer assisted case [1]. It also prevents the period of service
   disruption from being extended due to the effect of the above link-
   layer issues on L3 handover.

7. Extensions to the Fast Handover Operations

7.1 MN Operation

   The MN operation in [1] is affected by the changes introduced by this
   document. The addition to [1] is that a MN with an existing active
   binding which receives a new router advertisement (PrRtAdv) MUST be
   "eager" to establish new bindings. When a MN has at least one
   existing binding and receives a new PrRtAdv it MUST send a Fast
   Binding Update (F-BU) with the Simultaneous Bindings flag set (ôBö
   flag). The new flag is described in section 8. In addition the MN
   MUST be able to process the new simultaneous bindings option in the
   Fast Binding Acknowledgement message described in section 9. The
   lifetime field returned in this option MUST be used by the MN to
   identify the lifetime of the simultaneous binding requested. Two BU
   lifetime values will be returned: Bicasting lifetime (in the
   simultaneous bindings option) and new CoA lifetime (in the BA option)
   as described in the following sections. The new CoA lifetime (placed
   in the BA option as specified in [3]) runs in parallel with the
   Bicasting lifetime. Hence, when the bicasting lifetime ends, the MN
   will remove this entry from the Binding Update list and simply keep
   one entry for the new CoA with the remaining new CoA lifetime.





El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 7]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


7.2 HA/MAP/AR Operation

   The HA [3], MAP [4] and AR [1] are the possible recipients of a F-BU
   message. Upon receiving a F-BU message having the ôBö flag set (see
   section 8), the HA/MAP/PAR MUST create a new binding cache sub-entry
   (linked to the original entry for the old CoA) for the MNÆs new CoA.
   This sub-entry contains the same fields as normal binding cache
   entries but it MUST NOT replace any existing entries for the MN. The
   new sub-entry will have two lifetimes instead of one: the normal new
   CoA BU lifetime (sent in the BA) and a Bicasting lifetime set to
   SHORT_BINDING_LIFETIME (sent in the BA option). The new CoA lifetime
   runs in parallel with the Bicasting lifetime. Until the Bicasting
   lifetime expires, the HA/MAP/PAR MUST send a copy of the data
   destined for the MN to the old CoA and to the new CoA/s in the linked
   binding cache sub-entry or sub-entries. When the Bicasting lifetime
   expires, the MAP/HA/PAR MUST remove the bicasting lifetime field and
   replace the old binding cache entry for the old CoA with the new CoA
   sub-entry. As a result, the HA/MAP/AR will end up with one entry for
   the MNÆs new CoA with the remaining new CoA lifetime.

   In the link-layer assisted case [1] the F-BU messages are not used.
   When a bidirectional tunnel is established for the first time (i.e.
   not renewed) between PAR and NAR, the PAR MUST maintain two lifetime
   entries for the tunnel: normal tunnel lifetime (already described in
   [1]) and a Bicasting lifetime set to SHORT_BINDING_LIFETIME. Until
   the Bicasting lifetime expires the PAR MUST copy data destined to the
   MN both to its on-link CoA and through the tunnel to NAR. When the
   Bicasting lifetime expires, the PAR MUST stop bicasting and only
   forward traffic for the MN through the tunnel to nAR until the tunnel
   lifetime itself expires.

   The default value for SHORT_BINDING_LIFETIME is 2s. This parameter
   MUST be configurable as it my vary depending on the type of radio
   link in the system.

8. Simultaneous Bindings Flag in Fast Binding Update (F-BU) message

     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 #         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |A|H|L|K|M|B|    Reserved       |            Lifetime           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Mobility Options                       .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+





El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 8]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


    Description of the flag added to the F-BU option already defined in
   [1]:

        B              When set indicates a request for bicasting all
                       packets to both COAs of the MN (in the source
                       address field and the alternate-CoA suboption).
                       This BU will add another COA to the Binding
                       Cache.

9. Simultaneous Bindings option for Fast Binding Acknowledgement
  (F-BA) message

     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
                                    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                   |  Option Type  |  Option Len   |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |   status      |  Reserved     |           Lifetime            |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


         Option Type            TBD

         Option Len             TBD

         Status                 Indicates success (0) or failure (128
                                and above).

         Lifetime               The bicasting lifetime for the
                                simultaneous binding requested in the
                                F-BU. This value MUST be used by the MN
                                to record the validity of this binding
                                in its binding update list


   The alignment requirement for this option is 2n+2.


10. Multiple copies of packets received at AR

   If the MN has simultaneous active bindings with HA/MAP/AR, it could
   (but preferably should not) receive multiple copies of the same
   traffic directed to it. The use of simultaneous bindings does not
   mean that the MN is receiving packets contemporarily from multiple
   sources. This depends on the characteristics of the access (L2)
   technology. The bicasting of packets involves sending a copy of the
   data to the AR which the MN is moving to (the NAR). Until the MN
   actually completes the L2 handover to the NAR and fully establishes
   the new L2 link, the NAR MAY receive packets for a MN to which it
   does not have a direct link layer connection. If the new AR is aware




El Malki and Soliman                                           [Page 9]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   that the MN is performing a handover (due to earlier reception of the
   HI message) The AR MAY:

   - drop all packets for the MN,
   - drop some packets, based on local policies, or
   - buffer packets for the MN.

   The choice of which action to take may depend on the type of traffic
   involved (e.g. real-time or non real-time), but this is outside the
   scope of this document. The AR MAY also in parallel attempt to
   establish a link-layer connection with the MN. However an AR MUST NOT
   send ICMP Destination Unreachable messages if it drops packets or is
   unable to deliver the received IP packets due to unavailability of
   direct layer connection with the MN. This is because the MN will be
   receiving one copy of the packets. Note that the MN may also select
   which flows need bicasting by adding a Flow movement option [7] to
   the simultaneous binding update.

11. Reception of multiple copies in the MN

   In some rare scenarios it may be possible that the MN receives more
   than one copy of the same packet. Generally, Internet routing
   mechanisms can not guarantee the delivery of a single copy of an IP
   packet to a node. However some TCP congestion avoidance
   implementations are known to react negatively to the reception of 3
   duplicate acknowledgements. The Eifel detection and response
   algorithms in [5] and [6] address this problem. When using [5] and
   [6] bicasting should not cause any negative performance impacts for
   TCP. Alternatively, the MN may simply request bicasting for non-TCP
   connections using a Flow movement option as described in [7].

12. References

   [1] R. Koodli (Editor) et al, ôFast Handovers for Mobile IPv6ö,
   draft-ietf-mobileip-fast-mipv6-06.txt, work in progress, March 2003.

   [2] C. Perkins (Editor), ôIP Mobility Support for IPv4ö, RFC 3220,
   Jan 2002.

   [3] D. Johnson, C. Perkins and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in IPv6",
   draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-21.txt, work in progress, Feb 2003.

   [4] H. Soliman, C. Castelluccia, K. El Malki and L. Bellier,
   ôHierarchical MIPv6 mobility managementö, draft-ietf-mobileip-hmipv6-
   07.txt, work in progress, October 2002.

   [5] R. Ludwig, ôThe Eifel Detection Algorithm for TCPö, RFC 3522,
   April 2003.






El Malki and Soliman                                          [Page 10]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   [6] Ludwig, R. and  A. Gurtov, ôThe Eifel response algorithm for
   TCPö, draft-ietf-tsvwg-tcp-eifel-response-00, work in progress, July
   2002.

   [7] Soliman, H., ElMalki, K. and C. Castelluccia, ôFlow movement in
   MIPv6ö, draft-soliman-mobileip-flow-move-03, work in progress.

13. AuthorsÆ Addresses

   The authors may be contacted at the addresses below:

   Karim El Malki
   Ericsson Radio Systems AB
   LM Ericssons Vag. 8
   126 25 Stockholm
   SWEDEN

   Phone:  +46 8 7195803
   Fax:    +46 8 7190170
   E-mail: Karim.El-Malki@era.ericsson.se


   Hesham Soliman
   Flarion

   E-mail: H.Soliman@flarion.com


   The working group can be contacted via the current chairs:

           Basavaraj Patil               Phil Roberts
           Nokia Corporation             Megisto Systems Inc.
           6000 Connection Drive         Suite 120, 20251 Century Blvd
           Irving, TX 75039              Germantown MD 20874
           USA                           USA
           Phone:  +1 972-894-6709       Phone:  +1 847-202-9314
           EMail:  Raj.Patil@nokia.com   EMail:  proberts@megisto.com
           Fax :   +1 972-894-5349

14. Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
   document itself may not be modified in anyway, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other



El Malki and Soliman                                          [Page 11]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will
   not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
   This document and the information contained herein is provided onan
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."



Appendix A - Timing Calculations for bicasting


   Example 1
   ---------
                               +--------+
                        +------| MAP/HA |------+
                        |      +--------+      |
                        |                      |
                        v                      v
                     +-----+                +-----+
                     | PAR |                | NAR |
                     +-----+                +-----+


                          +-----+
                          | MN  |
                          +-----+   - - - - - >
                                     Movement

   This is the case specified by [1] with the extension of using the MAP
   from [4].

   A  = anticipation time (F-BU is sent from MN at time t-A, where t is
        the time when the MN actually hands-off at L2)
   h  = handover time (L2 only)
   D1 = MN to MAP delay (through PAR)
   D2 = MN to MAP delay (through NAR)
   p =  F-BU and routing table processing time in the MAP and MN

   To achieve zero L3 service disruption it is necessary for the time
   period between starting the fast handover and the MN completing the
   L2 handover to be greater than or equal to the tiem it take for
   traffic to reach the MN at its new link (through NAR). This is
   represented by the following formula:




El Malki and Soliman                                          [Page 12]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


                 (A+h)>=((D1+D2)+p)

   Assuming that p<<(D1+D2) this can be simplified to:

                 (A+h)>=(D1+D2)

   To achieve maximum performance from simultaneous bindings it is
   necessary for the above relation to hold.

   The Anticipation time (A) is important and needs to be calculated
   appropriately for the link-layer being used. Depending on the L2 this
   may need engineering to synchronise the L2 and L3 handovers.

   Once the MN has moved to NAR, it will be receiving traffic delayed by
   (D2-D1) with respect to when it was attached to PAR. To smooth this
   delay variation (jitter), which may be a problem for real-time
   services, it may be necessary to implement a smoothing buffer at NAR.


   Example 2
   ---------
                     +-----+                +-----+
                     | PAR | -------------->| NAR |
                     +-----+                +-----+
                          |
                          |
                          |
                          v
                         +-----+
                         | MN  |
                         +-----+   - - - - - >
                                     Movement

   When the MAP/HA/PAR are one entity (as considered in [1]), the
   following calculations apply.

   A  = anticipation time (F-BU is sent from MN at time t-A, where t is
        the time when the MN actually hands-off at L2)
   h  = handover time (L2 only)
   d  = MN to AR delay (assume constant as MN moves ARs)
   L  = PAR to NAR delay


   As previously, the following must be true for the simultaneous
   bindings to yield zero L3 disruption:

                             (A+h)>=(d+L+d)
                          => (A+h)>=(2d+L)






El Malki and Soliman                                          [Page 13]


INTERNET-DRAFT  Simultaneous Bindings for MIPv6 Fast Handovers May 2003


   The Anticipation time (A) is important and needs to be calculated
   appropriately for the link-layer being used. Depending on the L2 this
   may need engineering to synchronise the L2 and L3 handovers.

   Once the MN has moved to NAR, it will be receiving traffic delayed by
   an amount L with respect to when it was attached to PAR. To smooth
   this delay variation (jitter), which may be a problem for real-time
   services, it may be necessary to implement a smoothing buffer at NAR.


   Example 3
   ---------

   In BETH [1], a similar calculation applies as that in Example 2 but
   there is no need for the MN-AR communication. Therefore the following
   formula must be true to achieve zero service disruption at L3:

                              (A+h)>=(L+d)

   The Anticipation time (A) is important and needs to be calculated
   appropriately for the link-layer being used.

   Once the MN has moved to NAR, it will be receiving traffic delayed by
   an amount L with respect to when it was attached to PAR. To smooth
   this delay variation (jitter), which may be a problem for real-time
   services, it may be necessary to implement a smoothing buffer at NAR.




























El Malki and Soliman                                          [Page 14]