Network Mobility P. Thubert
Internet-Draft Cisco
Expires: April 5, 2005 R. Wakikawa
Keio University
V. Devarapalli
Nokia
October 5, 2004
NEMO Home Network models
draft-ietf-nemo-home-network-models-01
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
RFC 3668.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 5, 2005.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This paper documents some usage patterns and the associated issues
when deploying a Home Network for NEMO-enabled Mobile Routers,
conforming the NEMO Basic Support draft [8]. The aim here is
specifically to provide some examples of organization of the Home
Network, as they were discussed in NEMO related mailing lists.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology and concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. General Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Extended Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1 Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2 Returning Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3 Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Aggregated Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1 Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2 Returning Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2.1 Returning Home by egress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2.2 Returning Home by ingress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3 Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Virtual Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.1 Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.2 Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Mobile Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1 Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2 Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8.1 Changes from version 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
A. Returning Home emulation in the virtual case . . . . . . . . . 19
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 20
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
1. Introduction
This document assumes that the reader is familiar with IPv6 Mobility
as defined in [7], with the NEMO Basic Support [8] and with the NEMO
terminology document [10].
In order to read this document properly, the distinction between the
concepts of Home Link and of Home Network must be very clear. A Home
Link is a physical or a virtual Link, attached to a Home Agent. A
Home Network is an aggregation that can be further subnetted. As a
result, the Home Network is not necessarily contained on a Home Link.
In fact, the Mobile Network Prefixes are subnets of the Home Network.
How the two concepts relate in a given deployment depend on the
organization of the Home Network, as described below.
Four different organizations of the Home Network including a
hierarchical construction are documented:
Extended Home Network: In this disposition, the Home Network is only
one subnet of a larger aggregation that encompasses the Mobile
Networks, called extended Home Network. When at Home, a Mobile
Router performs normal routing between the Home Link and the
Mobile Networks. More in Section 4.
Aggregated Home Network: In this disposition, the Home Network
actually overlaps with the Mobile Networks. When at Home, a
Mobile Router acts as a bridge between the Home Link and the
Mobile Networks. More in Section 5.
Virtual Home Network: In this disposition, there is no physical Home
Link at all for the Mobile Routers to come back Home to. More in
Section 6.
Mobile Home Network: In this disposition, there is a bitwise
hierarchy of Home Networks. A global Home Network is advertised
to the infrastructure by a head Home Agent and further subnetted
into Mobile Networks. Each subnet is owned by a Mobile Router
that registers it in a NEMO fashion while acting as a Home Agent
for that network. More in Section 7.
In all cases, the Home Agents collectively advertise only the
aggregation of the Mobile Networks. The dichotomy is kept within the
Home Agents and the Mobile Routers, as opposed to advertised by means
of routing protocols to other parties.
The examples provided here aim at illustrating the NEMO Basic Support
draft [8] but do not aim at limiting its scope of application, and
additional cases may be added in the future.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
2. Terminology and concepts
The key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL in this document are to be
interpreted as described in RFC2119 [1].
The following terms used in this document are defined in the IPv6
Addressing Architecture document [5]:
link-local unicast address
link-local scope multicast address
Most of the mobility related terms used in this document are defined
in the Mobility Related Terminology document [6] and in the Mobile
IPv6 (MIP6) specification [7].
Additionally, some terms were created or extended for NEMO. These
specific terms are defined in the Mobile Network Terminology document
[10]:
Home Link
Home Network
Home Address
MRHA Tunnel
Mobile Aggregated Prefix
Aggregated Home Network
Extended Home Network
Virtual Home Network
Mobile Home Network
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
3. General Expectations
With Mobile IPv6, the Home Network is generally a physical network
interconnecting the Home Agents, and the Mobile Nodes that are at
Home. NEMO extends the concept of Home so that it is not only a flat
subnet composed of Home Addresses but an aggregation that is itself
subnetted in mobile and Home Networks. This aggregation is still
referred to as Home.
As an example, say that the aggregation has a global routing prefix
of m = 48 bits (A:B:C::/48), with subnet ID size of n = 16 bits ( n +
m = 64).
Say that a Mobile Router, MR1, owns the MNP A:B:C:1::/64: With NEMO
Basic Support, and depending on the deployment, MR1 may register
using a Home Address from the Home network, A:B:C:0::1, say, or a
Home Address, A:B:C:1::1, say, from one of its MNPs.
In a given deployment, one subnet may be reserved for the Home Link
(say A:B:C:0::/64) while the others are attributed to Mobile Routers
as Mobile Networks (as A:B:C:1::/64 for MR1). Another approach could
be to configure the Aggregation of Mobile Networks as the subnet on
the Home Link, and let the Mobile Routers manage the overlapping
networks. Finally, the aggregation could be configured on a virtual
network, with no physical Home Link at all, in which case Home means
topologically and administratively close to the Home Agent that owns
the virtual network.
The following sections provide additional information on these forms
of Home Network.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
4. Extended Home Network
4.1 Configuration
One simple approach is to reserve one or several subnets from an
aggregation for the Home Link, and to use the other subnets as MNPs.
In that case, the Home Network and the Mobile Networks do not
overlap. The aggregation is called an Extended Home Network and
depicted in Figure 1.
|
route v /48 A:B:C::/48
HA
| /64 A:B:C:0::/64
--+-----+--+- . -+- . -+--
| | | |
MR1 MR2 MRi MRN
/64 /64 /64 /64 A:B:C:i::/64 0 < i <= N
Extended Home Network
<----------------------------------------------------------->
Home Net Mobile Net Mobile Net ... Mobile Net
<------------><------------><------------> ... <------------>
Figure 1: Extended Home Network
In that configuration:
o There is one physical Home Network and multiple Mobile Networks
o The Home and the MNPs are tailored to allow for IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration with typical interface identifier length
for the type of interface (can be for example /64).
o The prefix length of the Extended Home Network is shorter than
that of the Home Network and the MNPs, since it is an aggregation
(can be for example /48).
o The Mobile Routers are assigned individually a Home Address from
the Home Network and use is to register their MNP(es). In that
case, the Home Agent performs DAD in the Home Network as
prescribed by Mobile IPv6 for the Home Addresses.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
o Alternatively, a Mobile Router could also form a Home Address from
one of its prefixes and use it to register, performing its own DAD
on its ingress network.
4.2 Returning Home
In the Extended Home Network model, the Home Network is configured on
a physical interface of the Home Agent, the Home Link.
A Mobile Router returns Home by connecting directly to the Home Link,
and dropping the MRHA tunnel.
If the Home Address of the Mobile Router is derived from one of its
Mobile Network Prefixes, then the MR may connect to the Home Link
using an egress interface and autoconfigure an address on the Home
Link. The MR recognizes the prefix of its Home Agent in order to
decide that it is Home. Note that in that case the Home Address does
not match the Home Prefix.
When at home, the Mobile Router ensures the connectivity of the
Mobile Network using standard router operations.
In particular, if the HA has the necessary information to continue
routing to the MNPs in the absence of registration, for instance if
the Home Address of the Mobile Router is derived from the Home
Network, and if the HA uses a static route to the MNP(es) via that
address, then the participation of the MR to the Home IGP is not
required.
But in the general case, when the MR is at Home, it resumes IGP
operations on the Home Link in order to advertise its Mobile
Networks.
Alternate procedures for ensuring the connectivity of the Mobile
Networks when at home are described in Section 6.
4.3 Applicability
The extended Home Network keeps the MIP6 concept of a Home Network
for both Mobile Nodes and Mobile Routers to take their Home Address
from. Since there is no overlap between the prefixes that are
affected to MNPs and prefix(es) that are dedicated to the Home Link,
it is possible for MNs and MRs to coexist with that model.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
5. Aggregated Home
5.1 Configuration
One other approach is to consider that the Aggregation of all the
MNPs is used plainly as the Home Network, referred to as the
Aggregated Home Network. This means that the Mobile Aggregated
Prefix is configured on the Home Link and advertised by the Home
Agent as a subnet, as depicted in Figure 2.
HA
| /56 Aggreg /56
--+-----+--+- . -+- . -+--
| | | |
MR1 MR2 MRi MRN
------ ------ ------ ------
/64 /64 /64 /64 Aggreg|i /64 0 < i <= N
Aggregated Home
== Home Net
<----------------------------------------------------------->
Mobile Net Mobile Net Mobile Net ... Mobile Net
<------------><------------><------------> ... <------------>
Figure 2: Aggregated Home
A node on the Home Link computes that the Aggregated Home Network is
actually a subnet on the Home Link and may use it for
autoconfiguration purposes. Such a node may also install a connected
route to the Aggregated Home Network over the Home Link.
As a result, unless the node has a better (longest match) route to a
given MNP, it will lookup all MNNs using Neighbor Discovery over the
Home Link.
Thus, the Home Agent MUST intercept all the packets to the MNNs on
the registered prefixes. In order to do so, the Home Agent might
perform ND proxying for all addresses in all registered Mobile
Network Prefixes, and protect the MNP space from autoconfiguration by
uncontrolled visitors on the Home Link.
Alternatives based on a routing protocol or ICMP redirect may apply
in some cases.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
5.2 Returning Home
The Aggregated Home Prefix is configured on a physical interface of
the Home Agent, the Home Link. As a consequence, the Home Agent has
a connected route to the Aggregated Home Network over the Home Link.
A Mobile Router returns Home by connecting directly to the Home Link,
and dropping the MRHA tunnel. The Mobile Router recognizes its Home
Link by a prefix match with its Home Agent.
Note that it must expect a shorter prefix than that of its Mobile
Networks, even if its Home Address is formed out of one of its MNPs,
but that the Home Address matches the Home Network Prefix.
Also, Note that in that case, it makes sense for a Mobile Router to
register using a Home Address from one of its own MNPs. Taking the
Home Address from its own range guarantees the unicity of the suffix.
That unicity can be checked by the MR on its ingress network using
DAD.
5.2.1 Returning Home by egress
A Mobile Router coming Home via its egress interface sees overlapping
prefixes between the ingress and the egress interface and some
specific support may be needed:
When a Mobile Router connects to the Home Link using its egress
interface, it might set up a bridge between its ingress interface(s)
and the Home Link.
Alternatively, the Mobile Router might perform ND proxying for all
addresses in its MNPs, between the egress and the related ingress
interface. Since the prefixes on the egress and ingress interfaces
are overlapping, routing is disallowed.
HA
| /56 Aggreg /56
--+-----+--+- . -+- . -+--
| | | |
MR1 MR2 MRi MRN
------ ------ ------ ------
/64 /64 /64 /64 Aggreg|i /64 0 < i <= N
Figure 3: Bridging between egress and ingress
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
5.2.2 Returning Home by ingress
Alternatively, if the MR has a single ingress Interface, the Mobile
Router may use the NEMO-Link to connect to the Home Link, merging the
two links in a single consistent network.
HA
| /56 Aggreg /56
--+-----+--+- . -+- . -+--
/64 /64 /64 /64 Aggreg|i /64 0 < i <= N
------ ------ ------ ------
MR1 MR2 MRi MRN
| | | |
Figure 4: Merging the Home and the Mobile Networks
This fits the connected route model, since the Aggregated Home is
truly located on that network. Note that in that case, it makes
sense for a Mobile Router to register using a Home Address from one
of its own MNPs. .
5.3 Applicability
With this model, there is no specific space for independent nodes as
any address in the aggregation belongs to a MNP, and thus to a Mobile
Router. This configuration excludes the cohabitation with MIP6 MNs
on the Home Link.
A MR that is at Home must own an address from the aggregation on its
egress interface and an address from its MNP -a subnet of that
aggregation- on its ingress interface. A pure router will reject
that configuration, and the MR needs to act as a bridge to enable it.
In order to deploy the aggregated Home Network model, one must check
whether that support is available in the MRs if returning Home is
required.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
6. Virtual Home Network
6.1 Configuration
The Home Link can be configured on the Home Agent on a virtual link,
in which case there's no physical Home Link for Mobile Routers to
return Home or for Home Agents to discover each others and perform
the ND level interactions as described in Mobile IPv6. [7]
/48 eg: A:B:C::/48
HA
| /64 A:C:C:E::/64
--+-----+--+- . -+- . -+--
| | | |
MR1 MR2 MRi MRN
/64 /64 /64 /64 A:B:C:i::/64 0 < i <= N
Figure 5: Virtual Home Network
The Extended Home Network and the Aggregated Home Network models can
be adapted for virtual links.
As in the case of a physical link, the Home Address of a Mobile
router can be constructed based on a dedicated subnet of the Home
Prefix or one of the MR MNPs.
Note that since the Home Address is never checked for DAD, it makes
the configuration easier to take it from the MNP as opposed to a
specific subnet.
There are certain advantages to making the Home Link a virtual link:
A virtual link may not experience any disruption related to
physical maintenance or to hardware problems, so it is more
available than a physical link. The high availability of the Home
Link is critical for the mobility service.
The Home Agent does not have to defend the Mobile Router's Home
Address through Proxy Neighbor Discovery. The Home Agent does not
also have to perform Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) for the
Mobile Router's Home Address when it receives a Binding Update
from the Mobile Router.
The Mobile Router does not have to implement the Returning Home
procedure (section 11.5.4 of Mobile IPv6. [7]).
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
In order for a Mobile Router to emulate returning Home, it can
connect to one or more access link(s) configured for that purpose on
the Home Agent. The Mobile Router, after connecting to the access
link, SHOULD not send any routing protocol updates on the egress
interface because the routing information from the Mobile Router
might adversely affect IPv6 route aggregation on the Home Network.
However, the Mobile Router must register its binding as if it was
accessing a foreign link.
There are also some drawbacks to the virtual Home Link approach:
There can be only one Home Agent since Mobile IPv6 relies on
Neighbor Discovery on the Home Link for other HA discovery and for
Duplicate Address Detection.
The Home Agent must maintain a Binding Cache entry for a Mobile
Router and forwarding state for its Mobile Network even when the
Mobile Router is directly connected to it. All traffic to and
from the Mobile Network is sent through the bi-directional tunnel
regardless of the Mobile Router location. This results in a
tunneling overhead even though the Mobile Router is connected to
the Home Network.
Some solutions can be proposed in order to perform an equivalent of
returning Home on a virtual Home Network. One such approach is
sketched in appendix as an illustration.
6.2 Applicability
At some point in the future, NEMO basic support may be extended to
operate fully at L3 for instance if the HAHA protocol [11] gets
standardized and deployed. Until then, NEMO operations still inherit
from mobile IPv6 [7] for the HA to HA communication, which is
basically based on Neighbor Discovery extensions over the Home Link.
Making that link virtual bars the deployment of multiple Home Agents,
which may be desirable for reasons of load balancing. Please refer
to the NEMO multihoming issues [12] draft for more on this.
Yet, for a deployment where a single HA is enough, making the Home
Link virtual reduces the vulnerability to some attacks and to some
hardware failures, while making the HA operation faster.
One should check with the product specifications of an HA to see
whether the implementation actually supports a Virtual Home Network,
and if so, whether in that cases, it is optimized for faster DAD-less
bindings.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
7. Mobile Home
7.1 Configuration
In this disposition, there is a bitwise hierarchy of Home Networks.
A global Home Network is advertised to the infrastructure by a head
Home Agent(s) and further subnetted into Mobile Networks. As a
result, only the Home Agent(s) responsible for the most global
(shortest prefix) aggregation receive all the packets for all the
MNPs, which are leaves in the hierarchy tree.
Each subnet is owned by a Mobile Router that registers it in a NEMO
fashion while acting as a Home Agent for that network. This Mobile
Router is at Home at the upper level of hierarchy. This
configuration is referred to as Mobile Home.
An example of that is the Cab Co configuration. Say a Taxi Company
owns a /32 prefix. This prefix is advertised at a fixed point, the
Headquarters say. Regional offices are deployed around the world.
Even though these regional offices are relatively stable in terms of
location and prefix requirement -say this changes every few years-
making them mobile allows a simpler management when a move has to
take place, or should the ISP service change.
global Home Network CAB:C0::/32 owned by HQ
<------------------------------------------------------------------->
HQ extended Home Net Mobile Home for SFO office
(casa)
CAB:C0:CA5A::/48 CAB:C0:5F0::/48
<----------------------------> ... <-------------------------------->
|
Home for offices HQ |
CAB:C0:CA5A:CA5A::/64 MN |
<----------------------><----> |
CAB:C0:CA5A:CA5A::CA5A |
CAB:C0:CA5A:CA5A::CA5B |
are HAs on link with for each office a route like |
|
CAB:C0:CA5A:CA5A::5F0 <---------------------- via
is the Home addr
of SFO office
Figure 6: CAB Company HQ configuration
Finally, each regional office owns a number of taxis, each one
equipped with a mobile router and an associated /64 prefix.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
For each Office, say San Francisco (SFO) as an example:
Mobile Home Network CAB:C0:5F0::/48 owned by SFO office
<------------------------------------------------------------------>
SFO Home Network Mobile Networks for taxis
for taxis <---------------------...--------------------->
CAB:C0:5F0:5F0::/64 CAB:C0:5F0:CAB1::/64 CAB:C0:5F0:....::/6
<-------------------><-------------------> ... <------------------->
CAB:C0:5F0:5F0::5F0 |
is HA on link with for |
each taxi a route like |
|
CAB:C0:5F0:5F0::CAB1 <------ via
is the Home addrSsync
of CAB 1
Figure 7: CAB Company regional configuration
Note that the hierarchy occurs at a configuration level and may not
be reflected in the actual connection between nodes. For instance in
the Cab Co case, cabs are roaming within the city, each one attaching
to a different hot spot, while the regional office is connected to
the infrastructure using some ISP connection.
But it is also possible to reflect the organizational hierarchy in a
moving cloud of Mobile Router. If a Mobile Home Agent acts as
root-MR for a nested configuration of its own MRs, then the
communication between MRs is confined within the nested structure.
This can be illustrated in the case of a fleet at sea. Say that now
SFO is a communication ship of a fleet, using a satellite link to
join the infrastructure, and that the cabs are Mobile Routers
installed on smaller ships, equipped with low range radios.
If SFO is also the root-MR of a nested structure of cabs, the
communication between cabs is relayed by SFO and does not require the
satellite link. SFO recursively terminates the nested tunnels to the
cabs and reencapsulates all the packets between the nested cloud and
correspondents in the infrastructure in a single tunnel to CA5A, this
providing for nested NEMO Route Optimization.
7.2 Applicability
This complex topology applies to large distributed fleet, mostly if
there is a single interchange point with the internet (e.g. a NAT or
a socks farm) where the super HA could be located.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
One specific benefit is that when 2 MRs travel together with a common
HA, the traffic between the 2 is not necessarily routed via the
infrastructure, but can stay confined within the mobile cloud, the
Mobile Home Agent acting as a rendez-vous point between the MRs.
This applies particularly well for a fleet at sea when the long haul
access may be as expensive as a satellite link.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
8. Changes
8.1 Changes from version 00 to 01
Removed terminology (moved to the Nemo terminology draft).
Added an applicability statement for all documented cases
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
9. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank:
Erik Nordmark, Kent Leung, Thierry Ernst, TJ Kniveton, Patrick
Wetterwald and Alexandru Petrescu for their contributions.
10 References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[2] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)
Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[3] Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W. Simpson, "Neighbor Discovery
for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December 1998.
[4] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998.
[5] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)
Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, April 2003.
[6] Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology", RFC
3753, June 2004.
[7] Johnson, D., Perkins, C. and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in
IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.
[8] Devarapalli, V., "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support
Protocol", draft-ietf-nemo-basic-support-03 (work in progress),
June 2004.
[9] Ernst, T., "Network Mobility Support Goals and Requirements",
draft-ietf-nemo-requirements-02 (work in progress), February
2004.
[10] Ernst, T. and H. Lach, "Network Mobility Support Terminology",
draft-ietf-nemo-terminology-01 (work in progress), February
2004.
[11] Wakikawa, R., Devarapalli, V. and P. Thubert, "Inter Home
Agents Protocol (HAHA)", draft-wakikawa-mip6-nemo-haha-01 (work
in progress), February 2004.
[12] Ernst, T., "Analysis of Multihoming in Network Mobility
Support", draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-00 (work in
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
progress), July 2004.
Authors' Addresses
Pascal Thubert
Cisco Systems
Village d'Entreprises Green Side
400, Avenue de Roumanille
Batiment T3
Biot - Sophia Antipolis 06410
FRANCE
Phone: +33 4 97 23 26 34
EMail: pthubert@cisco.com
Ryuji Wakikawa
Keio University and WIDE
5322 Endo Fujisawa Kanagawa
252-8520
JAPAN
EMail: ryuji@sfc.wide.ad.jp
Vijay Devarapalli
Nokia Research Center
313 Fairchild Drive
Mountain View, CA 94043
USA
EMail: vijay.devarapalli@nokia.com
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
Appendix A. Returning Home emulation in the virtual case
When a Home Link is virtual, all traffic to and from the Mobile
Network is sent through the bi-directional tunnel even at the Home
Link. This section describes one possible mechanism that extends
NEMO Basic Support to eliminate this tunneling overhead.
Although the Home Link is virtual, the Home Agent has at least one
physical link to communicate with the external world. One or several
of such links, called the virtual Home Access Links, are conceptually
associated with the virtual Home Link and considered as part of Home.
When accessing one of its virtual Home Access Links, a Mobile Router
autoconfigures a Care-of Address from a Router Advertisement as it
would do on any visited link, in order to perform the next binding
flow.
If the Mobile Router is configured to recognize the virtual Home
Access Links as part of Home, it deregisters by sending a Binding
update with null lifetime sourced at the CareOf. Alternatively, the
Home Agent may indicate that the MR has moved to the virtual Home
Access Links as a status code in the binding acknowledgement. The
status code implies that Home Agent successsful de-register the
binding at the virtual Home Access Link. Detection of the virtual
Home Access Links is achieved by a prefix comparison(s) between the
care-of address and the prefix(es) on the virtual Home Access
Link(s).
With both approaches, the result of the binding flow is a
deregistration. Consequently, both the Mobile Router and the Home
Agent disable the bi-directional tunnel. At that point, the Home
Agent configures its forwarding in order to reach the Mobile Router
and its mobile networks at Home. For instance, this may take the
form of a route to the Mobile Network prefixes via the MR Home
Address, and a connected host route to the MR Home Address via the
virtual Home Access link.
After successful binding de-registration, the Mobile Router MUST
receive packets meant to the Mobile Router's Home Address at the
Virtual Home Link. How to intercept packets addressed to the Home
Address depends on implementations of the Mobile Router. If the Home
Address is not configured at the egress interface, the Mobile Router
MUST use proxy Neighbor Discovery to intercept all packets addressed
to the Home Address on the virtual Home Link. Otherwise, the Mobile
Router does not have to perform any special operation at the virtual
Home Link.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Home Network models with NEMO basic October 2004
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
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 (2004). 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.
Thubert, et al. Expires April 5, 2005 [Page 20]
