Mipshop Working Group                              Rajeev Koodli, Editor
INTERNET DRAFT                                     Nokia Research Center
14 April 2006


                     Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6
                  draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rev-00.txt

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   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 document is a submission of the IETF MIPSHOP WG. Comments should be
   directed to the MIPSHOP WG mailing list, mipshop@ietf.org.


   Abstract

   Mobile IPv6 enables a Mobile Node to maintain its connectivity to
   the Internet when moving from an Access Router to another, a process
   referred to as handover.  During handover, there is a period when
   the Mobile Node is unable to send or receive packets due to both
   link switching delay and IP protocol operations.  This ``handover
   latency'' resulting from standard Mobile IPv6 procedures, namely
   movement detection, new Care of Address configuration and Binding
   Update, is often unacceptable to real-time traffic such as Voice
   over IP. Reducing the handover latency could be beneficial to non
   real-time, throughput-sensitive applications as well.  This document
   specifies a protocol to improve handover latency due to Mobile IPv6
   procedures.  This document does not address improving the link
   switching latency.





Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page i]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006




                                 Contents


Abstract                                                               i

 1. Introduction                                                       2

 2. Terminology                                                        2

 3. Protocol Overview                                                  4
     3.1. Addressing the Handover Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . .    4
     3.2. Protocol Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    6
     3.3. Protocol Operation of Network-initiated Handover  . . . .    8

 4. Protocol Details                                                   9

 5. Miscellaneous                                                     13
     5.1. Handover Capability Exchange  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   13
     5.2. Determining New Care of Address . . . . . . . . . . . . .   14
     5.3. Packet Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   14
     5.4. DAD Handling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   14
     5.5. Fast or Erroneous Movement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   15

 6. Message Formats                                                   16
     6.1. New Neighborhood Discovery Messages . . . . . . . . . . .   16
           6.1.1. Router Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement
                 (RtSolPr)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   16
           6.1.2. Proxy Router Advertisement (PrRtAdv)  . . . . . .   18
     6.2. Inter-Access Router Messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   21
           6.2.1. Handover Initiate (HI)  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   21
           6.2.2. Handover Acknowledge (HAck) . . . . . . . . . . .   23
     6.3. New Mobility Header Messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   25
           6.3.1. Fast Binding Update (FBU) . . . . . . . . . . . .   26
           6.3.2. Fast Binding Acknowledgment (FBack) . . . . . . .   27
           6.3.3. Fast Neighbor Advertisement (FNA) . . . . . . . .   29
     6.4. New Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   30
           6.4.1. IP Address Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   30
           6.4.2. New Router Prefix Information Option  . . . . . .   31
           6.4.3. Link-layer Address (LLA) Option . . . . . . . . .   32
           6.4.4. Mobility Header Link-layer Address (MH-LLA) Option  34
           6.4.5. Neighbor Advertisement Acknowledgment (NAACK) . .   34

 7. Configurable Parameters                                           36

 8. Security Considerations                                           36

 9. IANA Considerations                                               37



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page ii]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


10. Acknowledgments                                                   38

11. Normative References                                              38

12. Author's Address                                                  39

13. Contributors                                                      39

 A. Change Log                                                        39

Intellectual Property Statement                                       40

Disclaimer of Validity                                                41

Copyright Statement                                                   41

Acknowledgment                                                        41



































Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 1]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   1. Introduction

   Mobile IPv6 [3] describes the protocol operations for a mobile node
   to maintain connectivity to the Internet during its handover from
   one access router to another.  These operations involve movement
   detection, IP address configuration, and location update.  The
   combined handover latency is often sufficient to affect real-time
   applications.  Throughput-sensitive applications can also benefit
   from reducing this latency.  This document describes a protocol to
   reduce the handover latency.

   This specification addresses the following problem:  how to allow a
   mobile node to send packets as soon as it detects a new subnet link,
   and how to deliver packets to a mobile node as soon as its attachment
   is detected by the new access router.  The protocol defines IP
   protocol messages necessary for its operation regardless of link
   technology.  It does this without depending on specific link-layer
   features while allowing link-specific customizations.  By definition,
   this specification considers handovers that inter-work with Mobile
   IP: once attached to its new access router, a MN engages in Mobile IP
   operations including Return Routability [3].  There are no special
   requirements for a mobile node to behave differently with respect to
   its standard Mobile IP operations.


   2. Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
   NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", "OPTIONAL", and
   "silently ignore" in this document are to be interpreted as described
   in RFC 2119 [1].

   The following terminology and abbreviations are used in this
   document.  The reference handover scenario is illustrated in
   Figure 1.

      Mobile Node (MN)
               A Mobile IPv6 host

      Access Point (AP)
               A Layer 2 device connected to an IP subnet that offers
               wireless connectivity to a MN. An Access Point Identifier
               (AP-ID) refers the AP's L2 address.  Sometimes, AP-ID is
               also referred to as a Base Station Subsystem ID (BSSID).

      Access Router (AR)
               The MN's default router





Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 2]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


      Previous Access Router (PAR)
               The MN's default router prior to its handover

      New Access Router (NAR)
               The MN's anticipated default router subsequent to its
               handover

      Previous CoA (PCoA)
               The MN's Care of Address valid on PAR's subnet

      New CoA (NCoA)
               The MN's Care of Address valid on NAR's subnet

      Handover
               A process of terminating existing connectivity and
               obtaining new IP connectivity.

      Router Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement (RtSolPr)
               A message from the MN to the PAR requesting information
               for a potential handover

      Proxy Router Advertisement (PrRtAdv)
               A message from the PAR to the MN that provides
               information about neighboring links facilitating
               expedited movement detection.  The message also acts as a
               trigger for network-initiated handover.

      (AP-ID, AR-Info) tuple
               Contains an access router's L2 and IP addresses, and
               prefix valid on the interface to which the Access Point
               (identified by AP-ID) is attached.  The triplet [Router's
               L2 address, Router's IP address and Prefix] is called
               ``AR-Info''.

      Assigned Addressing
               A particular type of NCoA configuration in which the NAR
               assigns an IPv6 address for the MN. The method by which
               NAR manages its address pool is not specified in this
               document.

      Fast Binding Update (FBU)
               A message from the MN instructing its PAR to redirect its
               traffic (towards NAR)

      Fast Binding Acknowledgment (FBack)
               A message from the PAR in response to FBU

      Fast Neighbor Advertisement (FNA)
               A message from the MN to the NAR to announce attachment,



Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 3]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


               and to confirm use of NCoA when the MN has not received
               FBACK

      Handover Initiate (HI)
               A message from the PAR to the NAR regarding a MN's
               handover

      Handover Acknowledge (HAck)
               A message from the NAR to the PAR as a response to HI




             v            +------------+
           +-+            |  Previous  |        <
           | | ---------- |   Access   | ------ > ----\
           +-+            |   Router   |        <      \
               MN         |   (PAR)    |                \
            |             +------------+            +---------------+
            |                   ^            IP     | Correspondent |
            |                   |         Network   |  Node         |
            V                   |                   +---------------+
                                v                        /
             v            +------------+                /
           +-+            |    New     |        <      /
           | | ---------- |   Access   | ------ > ----/
           +-+            |   Router   |        <
              MN          |   (NAR)    |
                          +------------+



               Figure 1: Reference Scenario for Handover



   3. Protocol Overview

   3.1. Addressing the Handover Latency

   The ability to immediately send packets from a new subnet link
   depends on the ``IP connectivity'' latency, which in turn depends
   on the movement detection latency and the new CoA configuration
   latency.  Once a MN is IP-capable on the new subnet link, it can send
   a Binding Update to its Home Agent and one or more correspondents.
   Once its correspondents successfully process the Binding Update,
   which typically involves the Return Routability procedure, the MN can
   receive packets at the new CoA. So, the ability to receive packets




Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 4]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   from correspondents directly at its new CoA depends on the Binding
   Update latency as well as the IP connectivity latency.

   The protocol enables a MN to quickly detect that it has moved to
   a new subnet by providing the new access point and the associated
   subnet prefix information when the MN is still connected to its
   current subnet (i.e., PAR in Figure 1).  For instance, a MN may
   discover available access points using link-layer specific mechanisms
   (e.g., a ``scan'' in WLAN) and then request subnet information
   corresponding to one or more of those discovered access points.  The
   MN may do this after performing router discovery.  The MN may also
   do this at any time while connected to its current router.  The
   result of resolving an identifier associated with an access point is
   a [AP-ID, AR-Info] tuple, which a MN can use in readily detecting
   movement:  when attachment to an access point with AP-ID takes place,
   the MN knows the corresponding new router's co-ordinates including
   its prefix, IP address and L2 address.  The ``Router Solicitation
   for Proxy Advertisement (RtSolPr)'' and ``Proxy Router Advertisement
   (PrRtAdv)'' messages 6.1 are used for aiding movement detection.

   Through the RtSolPr and PrRtAdv messages, the MN also formulates a
   prospective new CoA (NCoA), when it is still present on the PAR's
   link.  Hence, the latency due to new prefix discovery subsequent to
   handover is eliminated.  Furthermore, this prospective address can
   be used immediately after attaching to the new subnet link (i.e.,
   NAR's link) when the MN has received a ``Fast Binding Acknowledgment
   (FBack)'' message prior to its movement.  In the event it moves
   without receiving an FBack, the MN can still start using NCoA after
   announcing its attachment through a ``Fast Neighbor Advertisement
   (FNA)'' message; NAR responds to FNA in case the tentative address
   is already in use.  In this way, NCoA configuration latency is
   reduced.  Under some limited conditions where the probability of
   address collision is considered insignificant, it may be possible to
   use NCoA immediately after attaching to the new link.  Even so, all
   implementations MUST support the mechanism specified in this document
   to avoid potential address conflicts and SHOULD use them.

   In order to reduce the Binding Update latency, the protocol specifies
   a binding between the Previous CoA (PCoA) and NCoA. A MN sends a
   ``Fast Binding Update'' message to its Previous Access Router to
   establish this tunnel.  When feasible, the MN SHOULD send FBU from
   PAR's link.  Otherwise, it should send it immediately after detecting
   attachment to NAR. Subsequent sections describe the protocol
   mechanics.  In any case, the result is that PAR begins tunneling
   packets arriving for PCoA to NCoA. Such a tunnel remains active
   until the MN completes the Binding Update with its correspondents.
   In the opposite direction, the MN SHOULD reverse tunnel packets
   to PAR, again until it completes Binding Update.  And, PAR SHOULD
   forward the inner packet in the tunnel to its destination (i.e., to



Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 5]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   the MN's correspondent).  Such a reverse tunnel ensures that packets
   containing PCoA as source IP address are not dropped due to ingress
   filtering.  Readers may observe that even though the MN is IP-capable
   on the new link, it cannot use NCoA directly with its correspondents
   without the correspondents first establishing a binding cache entry
   (for NCoA). Forwarding support for PCoA is provided through a reverse
   tunnel between the MN and the PAR.

   Setting up a tunnel alone does not ensure that the MN receives
   packets as soon as attaching to a new subnet link, unless NAR can
   detect the MN's presence.  A neighbor discovery operation involving
   a neighbor's address resolution (i.e., Neighbor Solicitation and
   Neighbor Advertisement) typically results in considerable delay,
   sometimes lasting multiple seconds.  For instance, when arriving
   packets trigger NAR to send Neighbor Solicitation before the MN
   attaches, subsequent re-transmissions of address resolution are
   separated by a default period of one second each.  In order to
   circumvent this delay, a MN announces its attachment through the FNA
   message that allows NAR to consider MN to be reachable.  If there
   is no existing entry, FNA allows NAR to create one.  If NAR already
   has an entry, FNA updates the entry while taking potential address
   conflicts into consideration.  Through tunnel establishment for PCoA
   and fast advertisement, the protocol provides expedited forwarding of
   packets to the MN.

   The protocol also provides the following important functionalities.
   The access routers can exchange messages to confirm that a proposed
   NCoA is acceptable.  For instance, when a MN sends FBU from PAR's
   link, FBack can be delivered after NAR considers NCoA acceptable
   to use.  This is especially useful when addresses are assigned by
   the access router.  The NAR can also rely on its trust relationship
   with PAR before providing forwarding support for the MN. That is,
   it may create a forwarding entry for NCoA subject to ``approval''
   from PAR which it trusts.  Finally, the access routers could transfer
   network-resident contexts, such as access control, QoS, header
   compression, in conjunction with handover.  For all these operations,
   the protocol provides ``Handover Initiate (HI)'' and ``Handover
   Acknowledge (HAck)'' messages.  Both of these messages MUST be
   supported and SHOULD be used.  The access routers MUST have necessary
   security association established by means outside the scope of this
   document.


   3.2. Protocol Operation

   The protocol begins when a MN sends RtSolPr to its access router
   to resolve one or more Access Point Identifiers to subnet-specific
   information.  In response, the access router (e.g., PAR in Figure 1)
   sends a PrRtAdv message which contains one or more [AP-ID, AR-Info]



Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 6]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   tuples.  The MN may send RtSolPr at any convenient time, for instance
   as a response to some link-specific event (a ``trigger'') or simply
   after performing router discovery.  However, the expectation is that
   prior to sending RtSolPr, the MN has discovered the available APs
   by link-specific methods.  The RtSolPr and PrRtAdv messages do not
   establish any state at the access router, and their packet formats
   are defined in Section 6.1.

   With the information provided in the PrRtAdv message, the MN
   formulates a prospective NCoA and sends an FBU message.  The purpose
   of FBU is to authorize PAR to bind PCoA to NCoA, so that arriving
   packets can be tunneled to the new location of the MN. The FBU SHOULD
   be sent from PAR's link whenever feasible.  For instance, an internal
   link-specific trigger could enable FBU transmission from the previous
   link.  When it is not feasible, FBU is sent from the new link.  Care
   must be taken to ensure that NCoA used in FBU does not conflict with
   an address already in use by some other node on link.  For this, FBU
   encapsulation within FNA MUST be implemented and SHOULD be used (See
   below) when FBU is sent from NAR's link.

   The format and semantics of FBU processing are specified in
   Section 6.3.1.

   Depending on whether an FBack is received or not on the previous
   link, which clearly depends on whether FBU was sent in the first
   place, there are two modes of operation.

    1. The MN receives FBack on the previous link.  This means that
       packet tunneling would already be in progress by the time the
       MN handovers to NAR. The MN SHOULD send FNA immediately after
       attaching to NAR, so that arriving as well as buffered packets
       can be forwarded to the MN right away.

       Before sending FBack to MN, PAR can determine whether NCoA is
       acceptable to NAR through the exchange of HI and HAck messages.
       When assigned addressing (i.e., addresses are assigned by the
       router) is used, the proposed NCoA in FBU is carried in HI, and
       NAR MAY assign the proposed NCoA. Such an assigned NCoA MUST be
       returned in HAck, and PAR MUST in turn provide the assigned NCoA
       in FBack.  If there is an assigned NCoA returned in FBack, the MN
       MUST use the assigned address (and not the proposed address in
       FBU) upon attaching to NAR.

    2. The MN does not receive FBack on the previous link.  One reason
       for this is that the MN has not sent the FBU. The other is that
       the MN has left the link after sending the FBU, which itself may
       be lost, but before receiving an FBack.  Without receiving an
       FBack in the latter case, the MN cannot ascertain whether PAR
       has successfully processed the FBU. Hence, it (re)sends an FBU



Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 7]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


       as soon as it attaches to NAR. In order to enable NAR to forward
       packets immediately (when FBU has been processed) and to allow
       NAR to verify if NCoA is acceptable, the MN SHOULD encapsulate
       FBU in FNA. If NAR detects that NCoA is in use when processing
       FNA, for instance while creating a neighbor entry, it MUST
       discard the inner FBU packet and send a Router Advertisement with
       ``Neighbor Advertisement Acknowledge (NAACK)'' option in which
       NAR MAY include an alternate IP address for the MN to use.  This
       discarding avoids rare but the undesirable outcome resulting from
       address collision.  Detailed FNA processing rules are specified
       in Section 6.3.3.

   The scenario in which a MN sends FBU and receives FBack on PAR's
   link is illustrated in Figure 2.  For convenience, this scenario is
   characterized as ``predictive'' mode of operation.  The scenario in
   which the MN sends FBU from NAR's link is illustrated in Figure 3.
   For convenience, this scenario is characterized as ``reactive''
   mode of operation.  Note that the reactive mode also includes the
   case when FBU has been sent from PAR's link but FBack has not been
   received yet.

   Finally, the PrRtAdv message may be sent unsolicited, i.e., without
   the MN first sending RtSolPr.  This mode is described in Section 3.3.


   3.3. Protocol Operation of Network-initiated Handover

   In some wireless technologies, the handover control may reside in
   the network even though the decision to undergo handover may be
   co-operatingly arrived at between the MN and the network.  In such
   networks, the PAR can send an unsolicited PrRtAdv containing the link
   layer address, IP address and subnet prefixes of the NAR when the
   network decides that a handover is imminent.  The MN MUST process
   this PrRtAdv to configure a new care of address on the new subnet,
   and MUST send an FBU to PAR prior to switching to the new link.
   After transmitting PrRtAdv, the PAR MUST continue to forward packets
   to the MN on its current link until the FBU is received.  The rest of
   the operation is the same as that described in Section 3.2.

   The unsolicited PrRtAdv also allows the network to inform the MN
   about geographically adjacent subnets without the MN having to
   explicitly request that information.  This can reduce the amount
   of wireless traffic required for the MN to obtain a neighborhood
   topology map of links and subnets.  Such usage of PrRtAdv is
   decoupled from the actual handover.  See Section 6.1.2.







Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 8]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006




              MN                    PAR                  NAR
               |                     |                    |
               |------RtSolPr------->|                    |
               |<-----PrRtAdv--------|                    |
               |                     |                    |
               |------FBU----------->|--------HI--------->|
               |                     |<------HAck---------|
               |          <--FBack---|--FBack--->         |
               |                     |                    |
            disconnect             forward                |
               |                   packets===============>|
               |                     |                    |
               |                     |                    |
           connect                   |                    |
               |                     |                    |
               |--------- FNA --------------------------->|
               |<=================================== deliver packets
               |                                          |




                 Figure 2: ``Predictive'' Fast Handover



   4. Protocol Details

   All description makes use of Figure 1 as the reference.

   After discovering one or more nearby access points, the MN sends
   RtSolPr in order to resolve access point identifiers to subnet router
   information.  A convenient time to do this is after performing router
   discovery.  However, the MN can send RtSolPr at any time, e.g., when
   one or more new access points are discovered.  The MN can also send
   RtSolPr more than once during its attachment to PAR. The trigger for
   sending RtSolPr can originate from a link-specific event, such as the
   promise of better signal strength from another access point coupled
   with fading signal quality with the current access point.  Such
   events, often broadly referred to as ``L2 triggers'', are outside
   the scope of this document.  Nevertheless, they serve as events that
   invoke this protocol.  For instance, when a ``link up'' indication
   is obtained on the new link, protocol messages (e.g., FNA) can be
   immediately transmitted.  Implementations SHOULD make use of such
   triggers whenever available.





Koodli (Editor)              Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 9]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006




              MN                    PAR                  NAR
               |                     |                    |
               |------RtSolPr------->|                    |
               |<-----PrRtAdv--------|                    |
               |                     |                    |
            disconnect               |                    |
               |                     |                    |
               |                     |                    |
            connect                  |                    |
               |------FNA[FBU]-------|------------------->|
               |                     |<-----FBU-----------|
               |                     |------FBack-------->|
               |                   forward                |
               |                   packets===============>|
               |                     |                    |
               |<=================================== deliver packets
               |                                          |




                  Figure 3: ``Reactive'' Fast Handover



   The RtSolPr message contains one or more AP-IDs.  A wildcard requests
   all available tuples.

   As a response to RtSolPr, PAR sends a PrRtAdv message which indicates
   one of the following possible conditions.

    1. If the PAR does not have an entry corresponding to the new access
       point, it MUST respond indicating that the new access point is
       unknown.  The MN MUST stop fast handover protocol operations on
       the current link.  The MN MAY send an FBU from its new link.

    2. If the new access point is connected to the PAR's current
       interface (to which MN is attached), PAR MUST respond with a Code
       value indicating that the new access point is connected to the
       current interface, but not send any prefix information.  This
       scenario could arise, for example, when several wireless access
       points are bridged into a wired network.  No further protocol
       action is necessary.

    3. If the new access point is known and the PAR has information
       about it, then PAR MUST respond indicating that the new access
       point is known and supply the [AP-ID, AR-Info] tuple.  If the new



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 10]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


       access point is known, but does not support fast handover, the
       PAR MUST indicate this with Code 3 (See Section 6.1.2).

    4. If a wildcard is supplied as an identifier for the new access
       point, the PAR SHOULD supply neighborhood [AP-ID, AR-Info] tuples
       subject to path MTU restrictions (i.e., provide any `n' tuples
       without exceeding the link MTU).

   When further protocol action is necessary, some implementations MAY
   choose to begin buffering copies of incoming packets at PAR. If such
   FIFO buffering is used, PAR MUST continue forwarding the packets to
   PCoA (i.e., buffer and forward).  Such buffering can be useful when
   the MN leaves without sending the FBU message from the PAR's link.
   The PAR SHOULD stop buffering after processing the FBU message.  The
   size of the buffer is an implementation-specific consideration.

   The method by which Access Routers exchange information about
   their neighbors and thereby allow construction of Proxy Router
   Advertisements with information about neighboring subnets is outside
   the scope of this document.

   The RtSolPr and PrRtAdv messages MUST be implemented by a MN and
   an access router that supports fast handovers.  However, when
   the parameters necessary for the MN to send packets immediately
   upon attaching to the NAR are supplied by the link layer handover
   mechanism itself, use of above messages is optional on such links.

   After a PrRtAdv message is processed, the MN sends FBU and includes
   the proposed NCoA. The MN SHOULD send FBU from PAR's link whenever
   ``anticipation'' of handover is feasible.  When anticipation is
   not feasible or when it has not received an FBack, the MN sends
   FBU immediately after attaching to NAR's link.  This FBU SHOULD be
   encapsulated in a FNA message.  The encapsulation allows NAR to
   discard the (inner) FBU packet if an address conflict is detected as
   a result of (outer) FNA packet processing (see FNA processing below).
   In response to FBU, PAR establishes a binding between PCoA (``Home
   Address'') and NCoA, and sends FBack to MN. Prior to establishing
   this binding, PAR SHOULD send a HI message to NAR, and receive HAck
   in response.  In order to determine the NAR's address for the HI
   message, the PAR can perform longest prefix match of NCoA (in FBU)
   with the prefix list of neighboring access routers.  When the source
   IP address of FBU is PCoA, i.e., the FBU is sent from the PAR's link,
   the HI message MUST have a Code value set to 0.  See Section 6.2.1.
   When the source IP address of FBU is not PCoA, i.e., the FBU is sent
   from the NAR's link, the HI message MUST have a Code value of 1.  See
   Section 6.2.1.

   The HI message contains the PCoA, link-layer address and the NCoA of
   the MN. In response to processing a HI message with Code 0, the NAR



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 11]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


    1. determines whether NCoA supplied in the HI message is a valid
       address for use, and if it is, starts proxying [6] the address
       for PROXY_ND_LIFETIME during which the MN is expected to connect
       to NAR. The NAR MAY use the link-layer address to verify if a
       corresponding IP address exists in its forwarding tables.

    2. allocates NCoA for the MN when assigned addressing is used,
       creates a proxy neighbor cache entry and begins defending it.
       The NAR MAY allocate the NCoA proposed in HI.

    3. MAY create a host route entry for PCoA (on the interface to
       which the MN is attaching to) in case NCoA cannot be accepted
       or assigned.  This host route entry SHOULD be implemented such
       that until the MN's presence is detected, either through explicit
       announcement by the MN or by other means, arriving packets do not
       invoke neighbor discovery.  The NAR MAY also set up a reverse
       tunnel to PAR in this case.

    4. provides the status of handover request in Handover Acknowledge
       (HAck) message.

   When the Code value in HI is 1, NAR MUST skip the above operations
   since it would have performed those operations during FNA processing.
   However, it SHOULD be prepared to process any other options which
   may be defined in the future.  Sending a HI message with Code 1
   allows NAR to, loosely speaking, validate the neighbor cache entry
   it creates for the MN during FNA processing.  That is, NAR can make
   use of the knowledge that its trusted peer (i.e., PAR) has a trust
   relationship with the MN.

   If HAck contains an assigned NCoA, FBack MUST include it, and the
   MN MUST use the address provided in FBack.  The PAR MAY send FBack
   to previous link as well to facilitate faster reception in the
   event the MN be still present there.  The result of FBU and FBack
   processing is that PAR begins tunneling MN's packets to NCoA. If the
   MN does not receive an FBack message even after re-transmitting FBU
   for FBU_RETRIES, it must assume that fast handover support is not
   available and stop the protocol operation.

   As soon as the MN establishes link connectivity with the NAR, it
   SHOULD send a Fast Neighbor Advertisement (FNA) message (see 6.3.3).
   If the MN has not received an FBack by the time FNA is being sent, it
   SHOULD encapsulate the FBU in FNA and send them together.

   When the NCoA corresponding to the FNA message is acceptable, the NAR
   MUST,

    1. delete its proxy neighbor cache entry, if any is present.




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 12]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


    2. create a neighbor cache entry and set its state to REACHABLE
       without over-writing an existing entry for a different layer 2
       address.

    3. forward any buffered packets

    4. enable the host route entry, if any is present, for PCoA.

   When the NCoA corresponding to the FNA message is not acceptable, the
   NAR MUST

    1. discard the inner (FBU) packet.

    2. send a Router Advertisement with the NAACK option in which it MAY
       include an alternate NCoA for use.  This message MUST be sent
       to the source IP address present in FNA using the same Layer 2
       address present in FNA.

   If the MN receives a Router Advertisement with a NAACK option, it
   MUST use the IP address, if any, provided in the NAACK option.
   Otherwise, the MN should configure another NCoA. Subsequently, the MN
   SHOULD send an FBU using the new CoA. As a special case, the address
   supplied in NAACK could be PCoA itself, in which case the MN MUST NOT
   send any more FBUs.

   Once the MN has confirmed its NCoA, it SHOULD send a Neighbor
   Advertisement message.  This message allows MN's neighbors to update
   their neighbor cache entries with the MN's addresses.

   For data forwarding, the PAR tunnels packets to the MN using
   its global IP address valid on the interface to which the MN was
   attached.  The MN reverse tunnels its packets to the same global
   address of PAR. The tunnel end-point addresses must be configured
   accordingly.  When PAR receives a reverse tunneled packet, it must
   verify if a secure binding exists for the MN identified by PCoA in
   the tunneled packet, before forwarding the packet.


   5. Miscellaneous

   5.1. Handover Capability Exchange

   The MN expects a PrRtAdv in response to its RtSolPr message.  If the
   MN does not receive a PrRtAdv message even after RTSOLPR_RETRIES, it
   must assume that PAR does not support the fast handover protocol and
   stop sending any more RtSolPr messages.

   Even if a MN's current access router is capable of fast handover, the
   new access router to which the MN attaches may be incapable of fast



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 13]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   handover.  This is indicated to the MN during ``runtime'', through
   the PrRtAdv message with a Code value of 3 (see Section 6.1.2).


   5.2. Determining New Care of Address

   Typically, the MN formulates its prospective NCoA using the
   information provided in a PrRtAdv message, and sends FBU. The PAR
   MUST use the NCoA present in FBU in its HI message.  The NAR MUST
   verify if NCoA present in HI is already in use.  In any case, NAR
   MUST respond to HI using a HAck, in which it may include another NCoA
   to use, especially when assigned address configuration is used.  If
   there is a CoA present in HAck, PAR MUST include it in the FBack
   message.

   If PrRtAdv message carries a NCoA, the MN MUST use it as its
   prospective NCoA.


   5.3. Packet Loss

   Handover involves link switching, which may not be exactly
   co-ordinated with fast handover signaling.  Furthermore, the
   arrival pattern of packets is dependent on many factors, including
   application characteristics, network queuing behaviors etc.  Hence,
   packets may arrive at NAR before the MN is able to establish its
   link there.  These packets will be lost unless they are buffered
   by the NAR. Similarly, if the MN attaches to NAR and then sends an
   FBU message, packets arriving at PAR will be lost unless they are
   buffered.  This protocol provides an option to indicate request for
   buffering at the NAR in the HI message.  When the PAR requests this
   feature (for the MN), it SHOULD also provide its own support for
   buffering.


   5.4. DAD Handling

   Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) was defined in [7] to avoid address
   duplication on links when stateless address auto-configuration is
   used.  The use of DAD to verify the uniqueness of an IPv6 address
   configured through stateless auto-configuration adds delays to a
   handover.

   The probability of an interface identifier duplication on the same
   subnet is very low, however it cannot be ignored.  In this draft
   certain precautions are proposed to minimize the effects of a
   duplicate address occurrence.





Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 14]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   In some cases the NAR may already have the knowledge required to
   assess whether the MN's address is a duplicate or not before the MN
   moves to the new subnet.  For example, the NAR can have a list of all
   nodes on its subnet, perhaps for access control, and by searching
   this list, it can confirm whether the MN's address is a duplicate
   or not.  The result of this search is sent back to the PAR in the
   HAck message.  If such knowledge is not available at the NAR, it may
   indicate this by not confirming NCoA in the HAck message.  The NAR
   may also indicate this in the NAACK option as a response to the FNA
   message.  In such cases, the MN would have to follow the address
   configuration procedure according to [6] after attaching to the NAR.


   5.5. Fast or Erroneous Movement

   Although this specification is for fast handover, the protocol has
   its limits in terms of how fast a MN can move.  A special case
   of fast movement is ping-pong, where a MN moves between the same
   two access points rapidly.  Another instance of the same problem
   is erroneous movement i.e., the MN receives information prior to
   a handover that it is moving to a new access point and but it is
   either moved to a different one or it aborts movement altogether.
   All of the above behaviors are usually the result of link layer
   idiosyncrasies and thus are often tackled at the link layer itself.

   IP layer mobility, however, introduces its own limits.  IP layer
   handovers should occur at a rate suitable for the MN to update the
   binding of, at least, its HA and preferably that of every CN with
   which it is in communication.  A MN that moves faster than necessary
   for this signaling to complete, which may be of the order of few
   seconds, may start losing packets.  The signaling overhead over the
   air and in the network may increase significantly, especially in the
   case of rapid movement between several access routers.  To avoid the
   signaling overhead, the following measures are suggested.

   A MN returning to the PAR before updating the necessary bindings when
   present on NAR MUST send a Fast Binding Update with Home Address
   equal to the MN's PCoA and a lifetime of zero, to the PAR. The MN
   should have a security association with the PAR since it performed
   a fast handover from it to the NAR. The PAR, on receiving this
   Fast Binding Update, will check its set of outgoing (temporary
   fast handover) tunnels.  If it finds a match it SHOULD tear down
   that tunnel; i.e., stop forwarding packets for this MN and start
   delivering packets directly to the node instead.  The MN SHOULD NOT
   make any attempt to use any of the fast handover mechanisms described
   in this specification and SHOULD revert back to standard Mobile IPv6.

   Temporary tunnels for the purposes of fast handovers should use short
   lifetimes (in the order of a small number of seconds or less).  The



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 15]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   lifetime of such tunnels should be enough to allow a MN to update all
   its active bindings.  The default lifetime of the tunnel should be
   the same as the lifetime value in the FBU message.

   The effect of erroneous movement is typically limited to loss of
   packets since routing can change and the PAR may forward packets
   towards another router before the MN actually connects to that
   router.  If the MN discovers itself on an unanticipated access
   router, a Fast Binding Update to the PAR SHOULD be sent.  Since
   Fast Binding Updates are authenticated, they supersede the existing
   binding and packets MUST be redirected to the new confirmed location
   of the MN.


   6. Message Formats

   All the ICMPv6 messages have a common Type specified in [4].  The
   messages are distinguished based on the Subtype field (see below).
   The values for the Subtypes are specified in Section 9.  For all the
   ICMPv6 messages, the checksum is defined in [2].


   6.1. New Neighborhood Discovery Messages

   6.1.1. Router Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement (RtSolPr)

   Mobile Nodes send Router Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement in
   order to prompt routers for Proxy Router Advertisements.  All the
   link-layer address options have the format defined in 6.4.3.



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Type      |     Code      |          Checksum             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Subtype     |   Reserved    |          Identifier           |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Options ...
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-



       Figure 4: Router Solicitation for Proxy (RtSolPr) Message



 IP Fields:



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 16]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   Source Address
                  An IP address assigned to the sending interface

   Destination Address
                  The address of the Access Router or the all routers
                  multicast address.

   Hop Limit      255. See RFC 2461.

 Authentication Header
                  If a Security Association for the IP Authentication
                  Header exists between the sender and the
                  destination address, then the sender SHOULD include
                  this header. See RFC 2402.

 ICMP Fields:

   Type           The Experimental Mobility Protocol Type. See [4].

   Code           0

   Checksum       The ICMPv6 checksum.

   Subtype        2

   Reserved       MUST be set to zero by the sender and ignored by
                  the receiver.

   Identifier     MUST be set by the sender so that replies can be
                  matched to this Solicitation.

 Valid Options:

   Source Link-layer Address
                  When known, the link-layer address of the sender
                  SHOULD be included using the Link-Layer Address
                  option. See LLA option format below.

   New Access Point Link-layer Address
                  The link-layer address or identification of the
                  access point for which the MN requests routing
                  advertisement information. It MUST be included
                  in all RtSolPr messages. More than one such address
                  or identifier can be present. This field can also
                  be a wildcard address with all bits set to zero.






Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 17]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   Future versions of this protocol may define new option types.
   Receivers MUST silently ignore any options that they do not recognize
   and continue processing the rest of the message.

   Including the source LLA option allows the receiver to record the
   sender's L2 address so that neighbor discovery, when the receiver
   needs to send packets back to the sender (of RtSolPr message), can be
   avoided.

   When a wildcard is used for New Access Point LLA, no other New Access
   Point LLA options must be present.

   A Proxy Router Advertisement (PrRtAdv) message should be received by
   the MN as a response to RtSolPr.  If such a message is not received
   in a short time period but no less than twice the typical round trip
   time (RTT) over the access link or 100 milliseconds if RTT is not
   known, it SHOULD resend RtSolPr message.  Subsequent retransmissions
   can be up to RTSOLPR_RETRIES, but MUST use an exponential backoff
   in which the timeout period (i.e., 2xRTT or 100 milliseconds) is
   doubled prior to each instance of retransmission.  If Proxy Router
   Advertisement is not received by the time the MN disconnects from the
   PAR, the MN SHOULD send FBU immediately after configuring a new CoA.

   When RtSolPr messages are sent more than once, they MUST be rate
   limited with MAX_RTSOLPR_RATE per second.  During each use of
   RtSolPr, exponential backoff is used for retransmissions.


   6.1.2. Proxy Router Advertisement (PrRtAdv)

   Access routers send out Proxy Router Advertisement message
   gratuitously if the handover is network-initiated or as a response
   to RtSolPr message from a MN, providing the link-layer address,
   IP address and subnet prefixes of neighboring routers.  All the
   link-layer address options have the format defined in 6.4.3.


 IP Fields:

   Source Address
                  MUST be the link-local address assigned to the
                  interface from which this message is sent.

   Destination Address
                  The Source Address of an invoking Router
                  Solicitation for Proxy Advertisement or the address
                  of the node the Access Router is instructing to
                  handover.




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 18]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Type      |     Code      |          Checksum             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Subtype     |   Reserved    |          Identifier           |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Options ...
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-



         Figure 5: Proxy Router Advertisement (PrRtAdv) Message



   Hop Limit      255. See RFC 2461.

 Authentication Header
                  If a Security Association for the IP Authentication
                  Header exists between the sender and the
                  destination address, then the sender SHOULD include
                  this header. See RFC 2402.

 ICMP Fields:

   Type           The Experimental Mobility Protocol Type. See [4].

   Code           0, 1, 2, 3 or 4. See below.

   Checksum       The ICMPv6 checksum.

   Subtype        3

   Reserved       MUST be set to zero by the sender and ignored by
                  the receiver.

   Identifier     Copied from Router Solicitation for Proxy
                  Advertisement or set to Zero if unsolicited.

 Valid Options in the following order:

   Source Link-layer Address
                  When known, the link-layer address of the sender
                  SHOULD be included using the Link-Layer Address
                  option. See LLA option format below.

   New Access Point Link-layer Address



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 19]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


                  The link-layer address or identification of the
                  access point is copied from RtSolPr
                  message. This option MUST be present.

   New Router's Link-layer Address
                  The link-layer address of the Access Router for
                  which this message is proxied for. This option MUST be
                  included when Code is 0 or 1.

   New Router's IP Address
                  The IP address of NAR. This option MUST be
                  included when Code is 0 or 1.

   New Router Prefix Information Option.
                  Specifies the prefix of the Access
                  Router the message is proxied for and is used
                  for address auto-configuration. This option MUST be
                  included when Code is 0 or 1. However, when this
                  prefix is the same as what is used in the New
                  Router's IP Address option (above), the Prefix
                  Information option need not be present.

   New CoA Option
                  MAY be present when PrRtAdv is sent
                  unsolicited. PAR MAY compute new CoA using NAR's
                  prefix information and the MN's L2 address, or by
                  any other means.


   Future versions of this protocol may define new option types.
   Receivers MUST silently ignore any options they do not recognize and
   continue processing the message.

   Currently, Code values 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 are defined.

   A Proxy Router Advertisement with Code 0 means that the MN should
   use the [AP-ID, AR-Info] tuple (present in the options above) for
   movement detection and NCoA formulation.  The Option-Code field in
   the New Access Point LLA option in this case is 1 reflecting the LLA
   of the access point for which the rest of the options are related.
   Multiple tuples may be present.

   A Proxy Router Advertisement with Code 1 means that the message is
   sent unsolicited.  If a New CoA option is present following the New
   Router Prefix Information option, the MN SHOULD use the supplied NCoA
   and send FBU immediately or else stand to lose service.  This message
   acts as a network-initiated handover trigger.  See Section 3.3.  The
   Option-Code field in the New Access Point LLA option (see below) in




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 20]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   this case is 1 reflecting the LLA of the access point for which the
   rest of the options are related.

   A Proxy Router Advertisement with Code 2 means that no new router
   information is present.  Each New Access Point LLA option contains
   an Option-Code value (described below) which indicates a specific
   outcome.

    -  When the Option-Code field in the New Access Point LLA option is
       5, handover to that access point does not require change of CoA.
       No other options are required in this case.

    -  When the Option-Code field in the New Access Point LLA option is
       6, PAR is not aware of the Prefix Information requested.  The MN
       SHOULD attempt to send FBU as soon as it regains connectivity
       with the NAR. No other options are required in this case.

    -  When the Option-Code field in the New Access Point LLA option is
       7, it means that the NAR does not support fast handover.  The MN
       MUST stop fast handover protocol operations.  No other options
       are required in this case.

   A Proxy Router Advertisement with Code 3 means that new router
   information is present only for a subset of access points requested.
   The Option-Code field values (defined above including a value of 1)
   distinguish different outcomes for individual access points.

   A Proxy Router Advertisement with Code 4 means that the subnet
   information regarding neighboring access points is sent unsolicited,
   but the message is not a handover trigger, unlike when the message is
   sent with Code 1.  Multiple tuples may be present.

   When a wildcard AP identifier is supplied in the RtSolPr message,
   the PrRtAdv message should include any 'n' [Access Point Identifier,
   Link-layer address option, Prefix Information Option] tuples
   corresponding to the PAR's neighborhood.


   6.2. Inter-Access Router Messages

   6.2.1. Handover Initiate (HI)

   The Handover Initiate (HI) is an ICMPv6 message sent by an Access
   Router (typically PAR) to another Access Router (typically NAR) to
   initiate the process of a MN's handover.


 IP Fields:




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 21]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Type      |     Code      |          Checksum             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Subtype     |S|U| Reserved  |          Identifier           |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Options ...
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-



                Figure 6: Handover Initiate (HI) Message



   Source Address
                  The IP address of the PAR

   Destination Address
                  The IP address of the NAR

   Hop Limit      255. See RFC 2461.

 Authentication Header
                  The authentication header MUST be used when this
                  message is sent. See RFC 2402.

 ICMP Fields:

   Type           The Experimental Mobility Protocol Type. See [4].

   Code           0 or 1. See below

   Checksum       The ICMPv6 checksum.

   Subtype        4

   S              Assigned address configuration flag. When set, this
                  message requests a new CoA to be returned by the
                  destination. May be set when Code = 0. MUST be 0
                  when Code = 1.

   U              Buffer flag. When set, the destination SHOULD buffer
                  any packets towards the node indicated in the options
                  of this message. Used when Code = 0, SHOULD be set
                  to 0 when Code = 1.




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 22]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


  Reserved       MUST be set to zero by the sender and ignored by
                 the receiver.

  Identifier     MUST be set by the sender so replies can be matched
                 to this message.

 Valid Options:

   Link-layer address of MN
                  The link-layer address of the MN that is
                  undergoing handover to the destination (i.e., NAR).
                  This option MUST be included so that the destination
                  can recognize the MN.

   Previous Care of Address
                  The IP address used by the MN while
                  attached to the originating router. This option
                  SHOULD be included so that host route can be
                  established in case necessary.

   New Care of Address
                  The IP address the MN wishes to use when
                  connected to the destination. When the `S' bit is
                  set, NAR MAY assign this address.

   The PAR uses a Code value of 0 when it processes an FBU with PCoA as
   source IP address.  The PAR uses a Code value of 1 when it processes
   an FBU whose source IP address is not PCoA.

   If Handover Acknowledge (HAck) message is not received as a response
   in a short time period but no less than twice the typical round trip
   time (RTT) between source and destination, or 100 milliseconds if RTT
   is not known, the Handover Initiate SHOULD be re-sent.  Subsequent
   retransmissions can be up to HI_RETRIES, but MUST use exponential
   backoff in which the timeout period (i.e., 2xRTT or 100 milliseconds)
   is doubled during each instance of retransmission.


   6.2.2. Handover Acknowledge (HAck)

   The Handover Acknowledgment message is a new ICMPv6 message that MUST
   be sent (typically by NAR to PAR) as a reply to the Handover Initiate
   message.



 IP Fields:

   Source Address



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 23]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Type      |     Code      |          Checksum             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Subtype     |    Reserved   |          Identifier           |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Options ...
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-



             Figure 7: Handover Acknowledge (HAck) Message



                Copied from the destination address of the Handover
                Initiate Message to which this message is a
                response.

   Destination Address
                Copied from the source address of the Handover
                Initiate Message to which this message is a
                response.

   Hop Limit    255. See RFC 2461.

 Authentication Header
                The authentication header MUST be used when this
                message is sent. See RFC 2402.

 ICMP Fields:

   Type         The Experimental Mobility Protocol Type. See [4].

   Code
                0: Handover Accepted, NCoA valid
                1: Handover Accepted, NCoA not valid
                2: Handover Accepted, NCoA in use
                3: Handover Accepted, NCoA assigned
                   (used in Assigned addressing)
                4: Handover Accepted, NCoA not assigned
                   (used in Assigned addressing)
                5: Handover Accepted, use PCoA
              128: Handover Not Accepted, reason unspecified
              129: Administratively prohibited
              130: Insufficient resources




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 24]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   Checksum   The ICMPv6 checksum.

   Subtype      5

   Reserved     MUST be set to zero by the sender and ignored by
                the receiver.

   Identifier   Copied from the corresponding field in the Handover
                Initiate message this message is in response to.


 Valid Options:

   New Care of Address
        If the S flag in the Handover Initiate message is set,
        this option MUST be used to provide NCoA the MN should
        use when connected to this router. This option MAY be
        included even when `S' bit is not set, e.g., Code 2
        above.

   Upon receiving a HI message, the NAR MUST respond with a Handover
   Acknowledge message.  If the `S' flag is set in the HI message, the
   NAR SHOULD include the New Care of Address option and a Code 3.

   The NAR MAY provide support for PCoA (instead of accepting or
   assigning NCoA), using a host route entry to forward packets to the
   PCoA, and using a tunnel to the PAR to forward packets from the MN
   (sent with PCoA as source IP address).  This host route entry SHOULD
   be used to forward packets once the NAR detects that the particular
   MN is attached to its link.  The NAR indicates forwarding support
   for PCoA using Code value 5 in the HAck message.  Subsequently, PAR
   establishes a tunnel to NAR in order to forward packets arriving for
   PCoA.

   When responding to a HI message containing a Code value 1, the Code
   values 1, 2, and 4 in the HAck message are not relevant.

   Finally, the new access router can always refuse handover, in which
   case it should indicate the reason in one of the available Code
   values.


   6.3. New Mobility Header Messages

   Mobile IPv6 uses a new IPv6 header type called Mobility Header [3].
   The Fast Binding Update, Fast Binding Acknowledgment and Fast
   Neighbor Advertisement messages use the Mobility Header.





Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 25]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   6.3.1. Fast Binding Update (FBU)

   The Fast Binding Update message is identical to the Mobile IPv6
   Binding Update (BU) message.  However, the processing rules are
   slightly different.



                                    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                    |          Sequence #           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |A|H|L|K|        Reserved       |           Lifetime            |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Mobility options                       .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+





              Figure 8: Fast Binding Update (FBU) Message

      IP fields:

         Source address      The PCoA or NCoA

         Destination Address
                             The IP address of the Previous Access
                             Router

      `A' flag        MUST be set to one to request PAR to send a Fast
                      Binding Acknowledgment message.

      `H' flag        MUST be set to one.  See [3].

      `L' flag        See [3].

      `K' flag        See [3].

      Reserved        This field is unused.  MUST be set zero.

      Sequence Number See [3].

      Lifetime        See [3].




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 26]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


      Mobility Options
                      MUST contain alternate CoA option set to NCoA IP
                      address when FBU is sent from PAR's link.

   The MN sends FBU message any time after receiving a PrRtAdv message.
   If the MN moves prior to receiving a PrRtAdv message, it SHOULD send
   a FBU to the PAR after configuring NCoA on the NAR according to
   Neighbor Discovery and IPv6 Address Configuration protocols.

   The source IP address is PCoA when FBU is sent from PAR's link, and
   the source IP address is NCoA when sent from NAR's link.  When FBU is
   sent from NAR's link, it SHOULD be encapsulated within FNA.

   The FBU MUST also include the Home Address Option and the Home
   Address is PCoA. A FBU message MUST be protected so that PAR is able
   to determine that the FBU message is sent by a genuine MN.


   6.3.2. Fast Binding Acknowledgment (FBack)

   The Fast Binding Acknowledgment message is sent by the PAR to
   acknowledge receipt of a Fast Binding Update message in which the `A'
   bit is set.  The Fast Binding Acknowledgment message SHOULD NOT be
   sent to the MN before the PAR receives a HAck message from the NAR.
   The Fast Binding Acknowledgment MAY also be sent to the MN on the old
   link.


                                    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                    |    Status     |K|  Reserved   |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |           Sequence #          |           Lifetime            |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Mobility options                       .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+





         Figure 9: Fast Binding Acknowledgment (FBack) Message







Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 27]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


      IP fields:

         Source address      The IP address of the Previous Access
                             Router

         Destination Address The NCoA

      Status
                        8-bit unsigned integer indicating the
                        disposition of the Fast Binding Update.  Values
                        of the Status field less than 128 indicate that
                        the Binding Update was accepted by the receiving
                        node.  The following such Status values are
                        currently defined:

                        0 Fast Binding Update accepted
                        1 Fast Binding Update accepted but NCoA is
                        invalid.  Use NCoA supplied in ``alternate'' CoA


                        Values of the Status field greater than or equal
                        to 128 indicate that the Binding Update was
                        rejected by the receiving node.  The following
                        such Status values are currently defined:

                        128 Reason unspecified
                        129 Administratively prohibited
                        130 Insufficient resources
                        131 Incorrect interface identifier length


      `K' flag          See [3].

      Reserved          An unused field.  MUST be set to zero.

      Sequence Number   Copied from FBU message for use by the MN in
                        matching this acknowledgment with an outstanding
                        FBU.

      Lifetime
                        The granted lifetime in seconds for which the
                        sender of this message will retain a binding for
                        traffic redirection.

      Mobility Options  MUST contain ``alternate'' CoA if Status is 1.







Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 28]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   6.3.3. Fast Neighbor Advertisement (FNA)

   A MN sends a Fast Neighbor Advertisement to announce itself to the
   NAR. When the Mobility Header Type is FNA, the Payload Proto field
   may be set to IPv6 in order to assist FBU encapsulation.



                                    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                    |            Reserved           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    .                                                               .
    .                        Mobility Options                       .
    .                                                               .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



          Figure 10: Fast Neighbor Advertisement (FNA) Message

      IP fields:

         Source address      NCoA

         Destination Address NAR's IP address

      Mobility Options  MUST contain the Mobility Header Link-Layer
                        Address of the MN in MH-LLA option format.  See
                        Section 6.4.4.

   The MN sends Fast Neighbor Advertisement to the NAR, as soon as it
   regains connectivity on the new link.  Arriving or buffered packets
   can be immediately forwarded.  If NAR is proxying NCoA, it creates
   a neighbor cache entry in REACHABLE state.  If there is no entry at
   all, it creates one and sets it to REACHABLE. If there is an entry
   in INCOMPLETE state without a link-layer address, it sets it to
   REACHABLE. During the process of creating a neighbor cache entry, NAR
   can also detect if NCoA is in use, thus avoiding address collisions.
   Since FBU is encapsulated within FNA when sent from NAR's link, NAR
   drops FBU in case it detects any collision.

   The combination of NCoA (present in source IP address) and the
   Link-Layer Address (present as a Mobility Option) SHOULD be used to
   distinguish the MN from other nodes.







Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 29]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   6.4. New Options

   All the options are of the form shown in Figure 11.




   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Type      |    Length     |  Option-Code  |               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ~                              ...                              ~
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



                        Figure 11: Option Format


   The Type values are defined from the Neighbor Discovery options
   space.  The Length field is in units of 8 octets, except for the
   Mobility Header Link-Layer Address option, whose Length field
   is in units of octets in accordance with [3], Section 6.2.  And,
   Option-Code provides additional information for each of the options
   (See individual options below).


   6.4.1. IP Address Option

   This option is sent in the Proxy Router Advertisement, the Handover
   Initiate, and Handover Acknowledge messages.


   Type
        To be assigned by IANA

   Length
        The size of this option in 8 octets including the Type,
        Option-Code and Length fields.

   Option-Code
        1   Old Care-of Address
        2   New Care-of Address
        3   NAR's IP address

   Prefix Length
        The Length of the IPv6 Address Prefix.




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 30]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |      Type     |    Length     | Option-Code   | Prefix Length |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                          Reserved                             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                                                               |
  +                                                               +
  |                                                               |
  +                          IPv6 Address                         +
  |                                                               |
  +                                                               +
  |                                                               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



                     Figure 12: IPv6 Address Option



   Reserved
        MUST be set to zero by the sender and MUST be
        ignored by the receiver.

   IPv6 address
        The IP address for the unit defined by the Type field.



   6.4.2. New Router Prefix Information Option

   This option is sent in the PrRtAdv message in order to provide the
   prefix information valid on the NAR.


   Type
        To be assigned by IANA

   Length
        The size of this option in 8 octets including the Type,
        Option-Code and Length fields.

   Option-Code
        0

   Prefix Length



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 31]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



  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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |      Type     |    Length     |  Option-Code  | Prefix Length |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                          Reserved                             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                                                               |
  +                                                               +
  |                                                               |
  +                            Prefix                             +
  |                                                               |
  +                                                               +
  |                                                               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



            Figure 13: New Router Prefix Information Option



        8-bit unsigned integer.  The number of leading bits in the
        Prefix that are valid.  The value ranges from 0 to 128.

   Reserved
        MUST be set to zero by the sender and MUST be
        ignored by the receiver.

   Prefix
        An IP address or a prefix of an IP address.  The Prefix Length
        field contains the number of valid leading bits in the prefix.
        The bits in the prefix after the prefix length are reserved
        and MUST be initialized to zero by the sender and ignored by
        the receiver.


   6.4.3. Link-layer Address (LLA) Option


   Type
        To be assigned by IANA

   Length
        The size of this option in 8 octets including the Type,
        Option-Code and Length fields.

   Option-Code



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 32]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |    Type       |    Length     |  Option-Code  |      LLA...
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



                  Figure 14: Link-Layer Address Option



        0 wildcard requesting resolution for all nearby access points
        1 Link-layer Address of the New Access Point
        2 Link-layer Address of the MN
        3 Link-layer Address of the NAR (i.e., Proxied Originator)
        4 Link-layer Address of the source of RtSolPr or PrRtAdv
          message
        5 The access point identified by the LLA belongs to the
          current interface of the router
        6 No prefix information available for the access point
          identified by the LLA
        7 No fast handovers support available for the access point
          identified by the LLA

   LLA
        The variable length link-layer address.

   Depending on the size of individual LLA option, appropriate padding
   MUST be used to ensure that the entire option size is a multiple of 8
   octects.

   The New Access Point Link Layer address contains the link-layer
   address of the access point for which handover is about to be
   attempted.  This is used in the Router Solicitation for Proxy
   Advertisement message.

   The MN Link-Layer address option contains the link-layer address of a
   MN. It is used in the Handover Initiate message.

   The NAR (i.e., Proxied Originator) Link-Layer address option contains
   the Link Layer address of the Access Router for which the Proxy
   Router Solicitation message refers to.








Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 33]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   6.4.4. Mobility Header Link-layer Address (MH-LLA) Option

   This option is identical to the LLA option, but is carried in the
   Mobility Header messages, e.g., FNA. In the future, other Mobility
   Header messages may also make use of this option.  The format of the
   option when LLA is 6 bytes is shown in Figure 15.  When LLA size is
   different, the option MUST be aligned appropriately.  (See Section
   6.2 in [3]).


   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
                                  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                  |      Type     |    Length     |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  | Option-Code   |    Pad0=0     |         LLA                   |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                             LLA                               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



          Figure 15: Mobility Header Link-Layer Address Option




   Type
        To be assigned by IANA

   Length
        The size of this option in octets not including the Type,
        Length and Option-Code fields.

   Option-Code
        2  Link-layer Address of the MN

   LLA
        The variable length link-layer address.



   6.4.5. Neighbor Advertisement Acknowledgment (NAACK)

   Type
        To be assigned by IANA.

   Length
        8-bit unsigned integer.  Length of the option, in 8



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 34]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006



   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Type      |    Length     | Option-Code   |     Status    |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                          Reserved                             |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



        Figure 16: Neighbor Advertisement Acknowledgment Option



        octets. The length is 1 when a new CoA is not supplied. The
        length is 3 when a new CoA is present (immediately following
        the Reserved field)

   Option-Code
        0

   Status
        8-bit unsigned integer indicating the disposition of the Fast
        Neighbor Advertisement message. The following Status
        values are currently defined:

           1   The New CoA is invalid
           2   The New CoA is invalid, use the supplied CoA. The New
               CoA MUST be present following the Reserved field.
         128   Link Layer Address unrecognized
   Reserved
        MUST be set to zero by the sender and MUST be
        ignored by the receiver.


   Since the NAACK option is carried in a Router Advertisement, the
   Length field is units of 8 octets unlike in other options.

   The NAR responds to FNA with the NAACK option to notify the MN
   to use a different NCoA if there is address collision.  If the
   NCoA is invalid, the Router Advertisement MUST use the NCoA as the
   destination address but use the L2 address present in FNA. The MN
   SHOULD use the NCoA if it is supplied with the NAACK option.  If the
   NAACK indicates that the Link Layer Address is unrecognized the MN
   MUST NOT use the NCoA or the PCoA and SHOULD start immediately the
   process of acquiring a NCoA at the NAR.

   In the future, new option types may be defined.



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 35]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   7. Configurable Parameters

      Parameter Name       Default Value            Definition
      -------------------  ----------------------   -------
      RTSOLPR_RETRIES      3                        Section6.1.1
      MAX_RTSOLPR_RATE     3                        Section6.1.1
      FBU_RETRIES          3                        Section 4
      PROXY_ND_LIFETIME    1.5 seconds              Section 6.2.2
      HI_RETRIES           3                        Section 6.2.1




   8. Security Considerations

   The following security vulnerabilities are identified, and suggested
   solutions mentioned.

    1. Insecure FBU: in this case, packets meant for one address could
       be stolen, or redirected to some unsuspecting node.  This concern
       is the same as that in a MN and Home Agent relationship.

       Hence, the PAR MUST ensure that the FBU packet arrived from a
       node that legitimately owns the PCoA. The access router and its
       hosts may use any available mechanism to establish a security
       association which MUST be used to secure FBU. The current version
       of this protocol does not specify how this security association
       is established.  However, future work may specify this security
       association establishment.

       If an access router can ensure that the source IP address in
       an arriving packet could only have originated from the node
       whose link-layer address is in the router's neighbor cache, then
       a bogus node cannot use a victim's IP address for malicious
       redirection of traffic.  Such an operation is recommended at
       least on neighbor discovery messages including the RtSolPr
       message.

    2. Secure FBU, malicious or inadvertent redirection:  in this case,
       the FBU is secured, but the target of binding happens to be an
       unsuspecting node either due to inadvertent operation or due
       to malicious intent.  This vulnerability can lead to a MN with
       genuine security association with its access router redirecting
       traffic to an incorrect address.

       However, the target of malicious traffic redirection is limited
       to an interface on an access router with which the PAR has a
       security association.  The PAR MUST verify that the NCoA to
       which PCoA is being bound actually belongs to NAR's prefix.  In



Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 36]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


       order to do this, HI and HAck message exchanges are to be used.
       When NAR accepts NCoA in HI (with Code = 0), it proxies NCoA so
       that any arriving packets are not sent on the link until the MN
       attaches and announces itself through FNA. So, any inadvertent or
       malicious redirection to a host is avoided.  It is still possible
       to jam NAR's buffer with redirected traffic.  However, since
       NAR's handover state corresponding to NCoA has a finite (and
       short) lifetime corresponding to a small multiple of anticipated
       handover latency, the extent of this vulnerability is arguably
       small.

    3. Sending FBU from NAR's link:  a malicious node may send FBU from
       NAR's link providing an unsuspecting node's address as NCoA.
       Since FBU is encapsulated in FNA, NAR should detect the collision
       with an address in use when processing FNA, and it then drops
       FBU. When NAR is unable to detect address collisions, there is a
       vulnerability that redirection can affect an unsuspecting node.


   9. IANA Considerations

   This document defines four new experimental ICMPv6 messages which use
   the Experimental Mobility Protocol ICMPv6 format [4].  These require
   four new Subtype value assignments out of the Experimental Mobility
   Protocol Subtype Registry [4] as follows:

      Subtype    Description              Reference
      -------    -----------              ---------
      2          RtSolPr                  Section 6.1.1
      3          PrRtAdv                  Section 6.1.2
      4          HI                       Section 6.2.1
      5          HAck                     Section 6.2.2



   The document defines four new Neighbor Discovery [6] options which
   need Type assignment from IANA.
      Option-Type     Description              Reference
      -----------     -----------              ---------
      TBD             IP Address Option        Section 6.4.1
      TBD             New Router Prefix
                      Information Option       Section 6.4.2
      TBD             Link-layer Address
                      Option                   Section 6.4.3
      TBD             Neighbor Advertisement
                      Acknowledgment Option    Section 6.4.5






Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 37]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   The document defines three new Mobility Header messages which
   need type allocation from the Mobility Header Types registry at
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters:

    1. Fast Binding Update, described in Section 6.3.1

    2. Fast Binding Acknowledgment, described in Section 6.3.2, and

    3. Fast Neighbor Advertisement, described in Section 6.3.3

   The document defines a new Mobility Option which needs
   type assignment from the Mobility Options Type registry at
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters:

    1. Mobility Header Link-Layer Address option, described in
       Section 6.4.4.


   10. Acknowledgments

   The editor would like to thank all those who have provided feedback
   on this specification, but can only mention a few here:  Vijay
   Devarapalli, Youn-Hee Han, Suvidh Mathur, Gabriel Montenegro, Takeshi
   Ogawa, Sun Peng, YC Peng, Domagoj Premec, and Jonathan Wood.  The
   editor would like to acknowledge contribution from James Kempf to
   improve this specification.  The editor would also like to thank
   [mipshop] working group chair Gabriel Montenegro and the erstwhile
   [mobile ip] working group chairs Basavaraj Patil and Phil Roberts for
   providing much support for this work.


   11. Normative References

   References

   [1]  S. Bradner, ``Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
        Levels,'' Request for Comments (Best Current Practice) 2119,
        Internet Engineering Task Force, March 1997.

   [2]  A. Conta and S. Deering, ``Internet Control Message
        Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)
        Specification'', Request for Comments (Draft Standard) 2463,
        Internet Engineering Task Force, December 1998.

   [3]  D. Johnson, C. E. Perkins, and J. Arkko, ``Mobility Support in
        IPv6'', Request for Comments (Proposed Standard) 3775, Internet
        Engineering Task Force, June 2004.





Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 38]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   [4]  J. Kempf, ``Instructions for Seamoby and Experimental Mobility
        Protocol IANA Allocations (work in progress)'', Internet
        Engineering Task Force, June 2004.

   [5]  S. Kent and R. Atkinson, ``IP Authentication Header'', Request
        for Comments (Draft Standard) 2402, Internet Engineering Task
        Force, November 1998.

   [6]  T. Narten, E. Nordmark, and W. Simpson, ``Neighbor Discovery for
        IP Version 6 (IPv6)'', Request for Comments (Draft Standard)
        2461, Internet Engineering Task Force, December 1998.

   [7]  S. Thomson and T. Narten, ``IPv6 Stateless Address
        Autoconfiguration'', Request for Comments (Draft Standard) 2462,
        Internet Engineering Task Force, December 1998.


   12. Author's Address

     Rajeev Koodli, Editor
     Nokia Research Center
     313 Fairchild Drive
     Mountain View, CA 94043 USA
     Phone: +1 650 625 2359
     Fax: +1 650 625 2502
     E-Mail: Rajeev.Koodli@nokia.com


   13. Contributors

   This document has its origins in the fast handover design team
   effort.  The members of this design team in alphabetical order were;
   Gopal Dommety, Karim El-Malki, Mohammed Khalil, Charles Perkins,
   Hesham Soliman, George Tsirtsis and Alper Yegin.


   A. Change Log

   The following revisions have been done since IESG review in Sep 04.

    -  Added IPSec AH reference.

    -  Changed options format to make use of RFC 2461 options Type
       space.  Revised IANA Considerations section accordingly.

    -  Added exponential backoff for retransmissions.  Added rate
       limiting for RtSolPr message.





Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 39]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


    -  Replaced ``attachment point'' with ``access point'' for
       consistency.

    -  Clarified [AP-ID, AR-Info] in Section 2.  Clarified use of Prefix
       Information Option in Section 6.1.2.

    -  Separated MH-LLA from LLA to future-proof LLA option.

   The following changes refer up to version 02 (under mipshop).  The
   Section numbers refer to version 06 (under mobile ip).

    -  New ICMPv6 format incorporated.  ID Nits conformance.

    -  Last Call comments incorporated

    -  Revised the security considerations section in v07

    -  Refined and added a section on network-initiated handover v07

    -  Section 3 format change

    -  Section 4 format change (i.e., no subsections).

    -  Description in Section 4.4 merged with ``Fast or Erroneous
       Movement''

    -  Section 4.5 deprecated

    -  Section 4.6 deprecated

    -  Revision of some message formats in Section 6


   Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the
   use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this




Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 40]


Internet Draft              Fast Handovers               14 April 2006


   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


   Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided
   on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE
   REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE
   INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.


   Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.


   Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.




















Koodli (Editor)             Expires 14 October 2006              [Page 41]