Netext WG                                                        X. Zhou
Internet-Draft                                           ZTE Corporation
Intended status: Standards Track                             J. Korhonen
Expires: September 13, 2012                       Nokia Siemens Networks
                                                             C. Williams
                                                              Consultant
                                                           S. Gundavelli
                                                                   Cisco
                                                           CJ. Bernardos
                                                                    UC3M
                                                          March 12, 2012


                Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6
                      draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-02

Abstract

   Proxy Mobile IPv6 enables IP mobility for a host without requiring
   its participation in any mobility signaling, being the network
   responsible for managing IP mobility on behalf of the host.  However,
   Proxy Mobile IPv6 does not support assigning a prefix to a router and
   managing its IP mobility.  This document specifies an extension to
   Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol for supporting network mobility using
   DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 13, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.




Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Convention and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6 . . . . . . . .  5
     3.1.  Assumptions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.2.  Network Mobility Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.3.  Binding association with the delegated prefix  . . . . . .  5
       3.3.1.  Mobile Router initiated prefix delegation in PMIPv6  .  6
       3.3.2.  Refreshing the Delegated Prefix in Proxy Mobile
               IPv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       3.3.3.  Deletion of the Delegated Prefix in Proxy Mobile
               IPv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     3.4.  Mobile Access Gateway Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       3.4.1.  Extension to Binding Update List Entry Data
               Structure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       3.4.2.  Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       3.4.3.  Handover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     3.5.  Local Mobility Anchor Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.5.1.  Extension to Binding Cache Entry Data Structure  . . .  9
       3.5.2.  Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   5.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     7.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14












Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


1.  Introduction

   Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213] enables an IPv6 host to move within a
   PMIPv6-Domain without requiring its participation in any IP mobility
   signaling.  However, PMIPv6 does not support providing a network-
   based mobility service to a complete network which is roaming within
   a PMIPv6-Domain without requiring the mobile router of that network
   to run the Network Mobility Basic Support protocol [RFC3963].

   In order to support network mobility in Proxy Mobile IPv6, the IPv6
   prefix used by the mobile network should be topologically anchored by
   the local mobility anchor.  DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation [RFC3633]
   (DHCPv6-PD) can be used to assign mobile network prefix(es) to a
   mobile router (MR) as specified in DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for
   Network Mobility (NEMO) [RFC6276].  However, if the mobile router is
   provided with PMIPv6 Protocol as its mobility management when
   connecting the network and uses DHCPv6-PD [RFC3633] to obtain
   prefix(es) for the nodes in the mobile network behind the MR,
   currently PMIPv6 network entities (i.e., mobile access gateway and
   local mobility anchor) are not aware of the delegated prefix(es) and
   therefore any packets sourced from or destined to the delegated
   prefix would be discarded by the MAG or the LMA.  This document
   describes extension to PMIPv6 for supporting prefix delegation.




























Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


2.  Convention and Terminology

   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].

   All the mobility related terms used in this document are to be
   interpreted as defined in Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) [RFC6275], Proxy Mobile
   IPv6 specification [RFC5213], DHCPv6-PD for NEMO [RFC6276], DHCPv6-PD
   [RFC3633] and Mobility Related Terminology [RFC3753].  This document
   also provides the following context-specific explanation to the
   following term used in this document.

   Mobile Router (MR)

      Throughout this document, the term mobile router is used to refer
      to an IP router whose mobility is managed by the network.  The
      mobile router is not required to participate in any IP mobility
      related signaling for achieving mobility for an IPv6 prefix that
      is obtained in that Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain.































Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


3.  DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6

3.1.  Assumptions

   This specification extends PMIPv6 to assign a mobile network prefix
   to a mobile router for supporting network mobility.  The
   specification assumes that a MR is a regular IPv6 router without
   extension for mobility management.  The MR sends the packets from its
   mobile network to the MAG and the MAG delivers the packets to the
   mobile network via the MR.

   In order to use DHCPv6-PD as mobile network prefix assignment
   mechanism in mobile networks, this specification has following
   assumptions.

   o  The mobile router (MR) MUST be able to function as a requesting
      router (RR).

   o  The delegating router (DR) is located at the LMA.

   o  The MAG MUST have a DHCPv6 Relay Agent functionality (as described
      in [RFC5213] to be able to intercept the related DHCPv6 message
      sourced from the MR.

   o  The MR MUST either obtain the Home Network Prefix (HNP) before
      initiating the DHCPv6-PD procedure or in case of stateful address
      configuration simultaneously while configuring the Mobile Node
      Home Address (MN-HoA).

   o  The MR (as a RR) SHOULD support Prefix Exclude Option for
      DHCPv6-PD as described in [I-D.ietf-dhc-pd-exclude].

3.2.  Network Mobility Service

   The network mobility service of a MR is managed by the policy profile
   defined in [RFC5213].  During mobile router's initial attach
   procedure, the mobile access gateway (MAG) MUST identify the MR and
   acquire the policy profile to determine whether the network mobility
   service is offered to the MR.  If the network mobility service needs
   to be offered to the mobile node, the mobile access gateway MUST set
   the Mobile Router Flag (R) when sending the Proxy Binding Update
   (PBU) message to the LMA.

3.3.  Binding association with the delegated prefix







Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


3.3.1.  Mobile Router initiated prefix delegation in PMIPv6

   +-------------+    +--------------+          +-------------------+
   |Mobile Router|    |      MAG     |          |      LMA          |
   |(Req. Router)|    |(DHCPv6 Relay)|          |(Delegating Router)|
   +-------------+    +--------------+          +-------------------+
          |                  |                          |
          |                  |o========================o|
   1)     |                  |      PMIPv6 tunnel       |
          |                  |o========================o|
   2)     |-- Solicit ------>|                          |
          |                  |                          |
   3)     |                  |----------PBU------------>|
          |                  |                          |
   4)     |                  |<---------PBA-------------|
          |                  |                          |
   5)     |                  |--- Solicit ------------->|
          -                  -                -         - <-+
   6)     |                  |<-- Advertise ------------|   |
          |                  |                          |   |
   7)     |<- Advertise -----|                          |  Opt
          |                  |                          |  ion
   8)     |-- Request ------>|                          |  al.
          |                  |                          |   |
   9)     |                  |--- Request ------------->|   |
          -                  -                -         - <-+
   10)    |                  |<-- Reply-----------------|
          |                  |                          |
   11)    |<-- Reply --------|                          |
          |                  |                          |

    Figure 1: Prefix Delegation in PMIPv6 during the initial attachment
                           to the PMIPv6 Domain

   The steps of the procedures required to complete the delegation of an
   IPv6 prefix to a mobile router that is provided with network-based
   network mobility service in Figure 1 are as following:

   1.   The PMIPv6 tunnel is set up between the MAG and LMA as described
        in [RFC5213].  The MAG has the function of DHCPv6 Relay Agent
        between the MR and the DHCPv6 server and intercept all the
        DHCPv6 related messages.

   2.   The MR, acting as a "Requesting Router" as described in
        [RFC3633], sends a DHCPv6 SOLICIT message including one or more
        IA_PD option(s) to the MAG to acquire the delegated prefix(es).





Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


   3.   Upon receiving the DHCPv6 SOLICIT message, the MAG sends a PBU
        message including a Mobile Network Prefix (MNP) mobility option
        as defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC3963] to the LMA.  All the
        considerations from Section 5.3.1 of [RFC5213] MUST be applied
        on the encapsulated Proxy Binding Update message.  If the MAG
        does not know the delegated prefix, then mobile network prefix
        in the MNP option MUST be set to unspecified address "::" and
        prefix length to 0.  The LMA either assigns the MR a new
        delegated prefix or returns an existing one.

   4.   On reception of the PBU the LMA returns the assigned prefix in
        the MNP option carried by a Proxy Binding Acknowledgment (PBA)
        to the MAG, unless the prefix was the IPv6 unspecified address
        "::".  The assigned prefix is the same one that will be assigned
        via DHCPv6PD in step 6.  This prefix MUST be added to the
        delegated prefix(es) in the LMA binding cache which is extended
        as in Section 3.5.1.

   5.   The DHCPv6 Relay Agent on the MAG as described in [RFC3315]
        relays the DHCPv6 SOLICIT message to the delegation router.  The
        DR inserts one or more IA_PD option(s) including the delegated
        prefix(es) to the reply message.

        Note: steps 6 to 9 are not present if DHCPv6 Rapid Commit is
        used.

   6.   The DR sends delegated prefix(es) in one or more IA_PD(s) to the
        MAG (DHCPv6 Relay Agent) inside the DHCPv6 ADVERTISE message.

   7.   The MAG relays the DHCPv6 ADVERTISE message to the MR.

   8.   The MR sends DHCPv6 REQUEST message with the IA_PD option(s)
        received from previous message to the MAG (DHCPv6 Relay Agent).

   9.   The MAG relays the DHCPv6 REQUEST message to the DR.

   10.  The DR responses to the REQUEST from the MAG using DHCPv6 REPLY
        message.

   11.  The MR receives one or more IA_PD prefix(es) in the DHCPv6 REPLY
        message from the MAG.

3.3.2.  Refreshing the Delegated Prefix in Proxy Mobile IPv6

   When the MR sends DHCPv6 Renew messages to extend the lifetime of the
   delegated prefix, the messages are also intercepted by the MAG
   (acting as DHCPv6 Relay Agent) and relayed to the DR.




Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


3.3.3.  Deletion of the Delegated Prefix in Proxy Mobile IPv6

   If the lifetime of the delegated prefix (included in the IA_PD Prefix
   Option carried by the DHCPv6 Reply message) is set to zero, the MAG
   MUST trigger a PBU to remove the binding for that home mobile network
   prefix.

3.4.  Mobile Access Gateway Operation

3.4.1.  Extension to Binding Update List Entry Data Structure

   In order to support this specification, the conceptual Binding Update
   List Entry (BULE) data structure needs to be extended with a new
   prefix information field as [RFC3963] does.  This prefix information
   field is used to store the MNP information which is assigned to the
   MR in the PBA.

3.4.2.  Forwarding

   Forwarding packets sent to the mobile router's MNP:

   o  On receiving a packet from the bi-directional tunnel established
      with the MR's LMA, the MAG MUST first decapsulate the packet
      (removing the outer header) and then use the destination address
      of the (inner) packet to forward it on the interface through which
      the destination MNP is reachable.

   Forwarding packets sent by the mobile router:

   o  On receiving packets from a MR connected to one access link, the
      MAG MUST ensure that there is an established binding for the MR
      and its LMA before tunneling the packet to the MR's LMA.

   Other considerations from Section 6.10.5 of [RFC5213] also apply
   here.

3.4.3.  Handover

   When the MR moves from the previously attached MAG to the newly
   attached target MAG, the newly attached target MAG MAY know the
   mobile network prefix which was assigned during the previous
   attachment from some network element, e.g. from the previous MAG.  It
   is out of scope of this specification how the newly attached MAG
   could obtain the previously assigned mobile network prefix.  After
   handover to the new target MAG, a PBU message including the assigned
   mobile network prefix (if available) MUST be sent from the new target
   MAG to the LMA.  The LMA MUST check the mobile network prefix in the
   PBU message and return the same assigned mobile network prefix in the



Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


   PBA message.  If the previously assigned mobile network prefix is not
   available in the new target MAG, the new target MAG MUST contain the
   mobile network prefix set to unspecified address "::" and the prefix
   length to 0 in the PBU message.  In this case, the LMA MUST return
   the same previously assigned mobile network prefix in PBA.

3.5.  Local Mobility Anchor Operation

3.5.1.  Extension to Binding Cache Entry Data Structure

   In order to support this specification, the conceptual Binding Cache
   Entry (BCE) data structure needs to be extended with a new prefix
   information field as [RFC3963] does.  This prefix information field
   is used to store the mobile network prefix information which is
   assigned to the BCE in the PBA during the procedure of binding
   association with the delegated prefix in Section 3.2

3.5.2.  Forwarding

   Intercepting packets sent to the MR's mobile network prefix:

   o  When the LMA is serving to the MR, it MUST be able to receive
      packets destined to the MR's mobile network.  In order to receive
      those packets, the LMA MUST be the topological anchor of the MR's
      MNP(s).

   Forwarding packets to the MR:

   o  On receiving a packet from a correspondent node with the
      destination address matching the MR's MNP(s) the LMA MUST forward
      the packet through the bi-directional tunnel set up for the MR.

   Other considerations from Section 5.6.2 of [RFC5213] also apply here.


















Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


4.  Security Considerations

   This document describes extensions to the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol
   for supporting network mobility using DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation.
   The security considerations for DHCPv6 described in the "Security
   Considerations" section of the DHCPv6 base specification [RFC3315],
   the "Security Considerations" of the DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation
   specification [RFC3633], and the security considerations from the
   base Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213] apply when using the extensions
   defined in this document.









































Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


5.  IANA Considerations

   This document reuses the mobile network prefix option defined in
   [RFC3963] in Proxy Mobile IPv6 to assign the mobile network prefix
   via DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation.  It does not introduce any additional
   IANA considerations.













































Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


6.  Acknowledgments

   The work of Carlos J. Bernardos has also been partially supported by
   the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7-ICT-2009-5)
   under grant agreement n. 258053 (MEDIEVAL project) and by the
   Ministry of Science and Innovation of Spain under the QUARTET project
   (TIN2009-13992-C02-01).












































Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3315]  Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
              and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
              IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.

   [RFC3633]  Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic
              Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633,
              December 2003.

   [RFC3963]  Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and P.
              Thubert, "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol",
              RFC 3963, January 2005.

   [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
              and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.

   [RFC6275]  Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.

   [RFC6276]  Droms, R., Thubert, P., Dupont, F., Haddad, W., and C.
              Bernardos, "DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for Network Mobility
              (NEMO)", RFC 6276, July 2011.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-dhc-pd-exclude]
              Korhonen, J., Savolainen, T., Krishnan, S., and O. Troan,
              "Prefix Exclude Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix
              Delegation", draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude-04 (work in
              progress), December 2011.

   [RFC3753]  Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology",
              RFC 3753, June 2004.












Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft   Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6      March 2012


Authors' Addresses

   Xingyue Zhou
   ZTE Corporation
   No.50 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District
   Nanjing
   China

   Phone: +86-25-8801-4634
   Email: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn


   Jouni Korhonen
   Nokia Siemens Networks
   Linnoitustie 6
   Espoo  FIN-02600
   Finland

   Email: jouni.nospam@gmail.com


   Carl Williams
   Consultant
   San Jose, CA
   USA

   Email: carlw@mcsr-labs.org


   Sri Gundavelli
   Cisco
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   Email: sgundave@cisco.com


   Carlos J. Bernardos
   Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
   Av. Universidad, 30
   Leganes, Madrid  28911
   Spain

   Phone: +34 91624 6236
   Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
   URI:   http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/




Zhou, et al.           Expires September 13, 2012              [Page 14]