Network Working Group A. Muhanna
Internet-Draft M. Khalil
Intended status: Standards Track Nortel
Expires: April 10, 2009 S. Gundavelli
K. Leung
Cisco Systems
October 07, 2008
GRE Key Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
draft-ietf-netlmm-grekey-option-01.txt
Status of this Memo
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 Internet-Draft will expire on April 10, 2009.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
Abstract
This document defines a new Mobility Option for allowing the mobile
access gateway and the local mobility anchor to negotiate GRE
encapsulation mode and exchange the downlink and uplink GRE keys
which are used for marking the downlink and uplink traffic that
belong to a specific mobile node session or a specific flow.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions & Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. GRE Encapsulation and Key Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. GRE Encapsulation Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. GRE Encapsulation Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. GRE Key Exchange Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.1. Initial GRE Key Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.2. GRE Key Exchange During Binding Re-registration . . . 6
4. Mobile Access Gateway Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Extensions to the Conceptual Data Structure . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Operational Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Local Mobility Anchor Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. Extensions to the Binding Cache Entry . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. Operational Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Message Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.1. GRE Key Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.2. Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 16
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
1. Introduction
The base Proxy Mobile IPv6 specification [RFC5213] and Proxy Mobile
IPv6 support for IPv4 [ID-PMIP6-IPv4] allow the use of IPv6 and IPv4
encapsulation modes [RFC2473] , [RFC2003] for the tunneled traffic
between the local mobility anchor and the mobile access gateway.
There are scenarios where these encapsulation modes are not
sufficient to uniquely identify the destination of packets of a
specific flow. Thus, there is a need for an encapsulation mode with
richer semantics. The Generic Routing Encapsulation [RFC2784] and
the Key extension as defined in [RFC2890], has the required semantics
to allow such distinction for use in Proxy Mobile IPv6.
This document defines the GRE Key option to be used for the
negotiation of GRE encapsulation mode and the exchange of the uplink
and downlink GRE keys. The negotiated downlink and uplink GRE keys
can be used for marking the downlink and uplink traffic for a
specific mobile node session or a specific flow.
2. Conventions & Terminology
2.1. Conventions
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2.2. Terminology
All the general mobility related terminology and abbreviations are to
be interpreted as defined in Mobile IPv6 specification [RFC3775] and
Proxy Mobile IPv6 specification [RFC5213]. The following terms are
used in this document.
Downlink Traffic
The traffic in the tunnel between the local mobility anchor and
the mobile access gateway, heading towards the mobile access
gateway and tunneled at the local mobility anchor. This traffic
is also called forward direction traffic.
Uplink Traffic
The traffic in the tunnel between the mobile access gateway and
the local mobility anchor, heading towards the local mobility
anchor and tunneled at the mobile access gateway. This traffic is
also called reverse direction traffic.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
Downlink GRE Key
The GRE key is assigned by the mobile access gateway and used by
the local mobility anchor to mark the downlink traffic which
belongs to a specific mobile node session or flow as described in
this document.
Uplink GRE Key
The GRE key is assigned by the local mobility anchor and used by
the mobile access gateway to mark the uplink traffic which belongs
to a specific mobile node session or flow as described in this
document.
3. GRE Encapsulation and Key Exchange
3.1. GRE Encapsulation Overview
Using the GRE Key option defined in this specification, the mobile
access gateway and the local mobility anchor can negotiate GRE
encapsulation mode and exchange the GRE keys for marking the downlink
and uplink traffic.
Once the GRE keys have been exchanged between the mobile access
gateway and the local mobility anchor, the mobile access gateway will
use the uplink GRE key that is assigned by the local mobility anchor
in the GRE encapsulation header of the uplink payload packet.
Similarly, the local mobility anchor will use the downlink GRE key as
negotiated with the mobile access gateway in the GRE encapsulation
header of the downlink payload packet.
The following illustration explains the use of GRE encapsulation mode
and the GRE keys for supporting the usecase where overlapping IPv4
private address [RFC1918] allocation is in use.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
+------------+
| Operator-A |
| |
| 10.x.0.0/16|
+------------+
/
+------+ +------+ /
| | ========================== | | /
MN-1---| | / \ | | / Key-1
| M | / ---Flows with GRE Key-1 ---- \ | L | / Traffic
MN-2---| A |--| |--| M |-
| G | \ ---Flows with GRE Key-2 ---- / | A | \ Key-2
MN-3---| | \ / | | \Traffic
| | ========================== | | \
MN-4---| | Proxy Mobile IPv6 Tunnel | | \
+------+ +------+ \
\
Operator-C: Access Network +------------+
| Operator-B |
| |
| 10.x.0.0/16|
+------------+
Figure 1: Overlapping IPv4 Private Address Space
Figure 1 illustrates a local mobility anchor providing mobility
service to mobile nodes that are from different operators and are
assigned IPv4 addresses from overlapping private address space. In
this scenario, the mobile access gateway and the local mobility
anchor must be able distinguish the flows belonging to a given
operator from the flows belonging to some other operator.
The mobile nodes, MN-1 and MN-2 are visiting from Operator-A, and
mobile nodes, MN-3 and MN-4 are visiting from Operator-B. The mobile
access gateway and the local mobility anchor exchange a specific pair
of downlink and uplink GRE keys and save them as part of the mobile
node binding to be used for identifying the flows belonging to each
mobile node.
The LMA and the MAG will be able to distinguish each mobile node
flow(s) based on the GRE key present in the GRE header of the
tunneled packet, and route them accordingly.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
3.2. GRE Encapsulation Support
To request GRE encapsulation support without exchanging the GRE keys,
the mobile access gateway MUST include the GRE Key option in the
Proxy Binding Update message sent to the local mobility anchor. The
mobile access gateway MUST set the length field of the GRE Key option
to 2 octets.
If the local mobility anchor supports GRE encapsulation and after
successfully processes the Proxy Binding Update, the LMA sends a
Proxy Binding Acknowledgement and MUST include the GRE Key option
with the length field set to 2 octets.
3.3. GRE Key Exchange Mechanism
The following subsections describe how the mobile access gateway and
the local mobility anchor exchange downlink and uplink GRE keys using
proxy mobile IPv6 registration procedure.
3.3.1. Initial GRE Key Exchange
When the mobile access gateway determines, based on, e.g., private
IPv4 address support [RFC1918], the MAG local policy, or the MAG-LMA
peer agreement, that GRE encapsulation is needed and GRE keys is
required, the mobile access gateway MUST include the GRE Key option
in the initial Proxy Binding Update message sent to the local
mobility anchor. The mobile access gateway MUST include the downlink
GRE key in the GRE Key Identifier field of the GRE Key option.
After successfully processes the initial Proxy Binding Update and
accepting the downlink GRE key, the LMA MUST include the GRE Key
option with the uplink GRE key in the GRE Key Identifier field when
sending a successful Proxy Binding Acknowledgement to the MAG.
3.3.2. GRE Key Exchange During Binding Re-registration
If the MAG has successfully negotiated and exchanged the initial GRE
keys with the LMA for a specific binding, the MAG SHOULD NOT include
the GRE Key option with the downlink GRE key in the Proxy Binding
Update which is used for requesting a Binding Lifetime Extension.
However, during inter-MAG handoff and if the new mobile access
gateway determines, based on, e.g., private IPv4 address support, the
MAG local policy, the MAG-LMA peer agreement, or an indication during
the handoff process, that GRE encapsulation and GRE key exchange is
required, the new mobile access gateway MUST include the GRE key
option with the downlink GRE key in the Proxy Binding Update which is
used for requesting an after handoff Binding Lifetime extension. In
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
this case, the new MAG may either pick a new downlink GRE key or use
the downlink GRE key that was used by the previous MAG for the same
binding. For the new MAG to know the downlink GRE key used by the
previous MAG, it may require transfer of context from the previous
MAG to the new MAG during a handover. Such mechanisms are out-of-
scope for this document.
If the LMA successfully processes a handoff-triggered Binding
Lifetime Extension Proxy Binding Update message which contains a GRE
key option with a downlink GRE key included, the LMA MUST return the
same uplink GRE key that was exchanged with the previous MAG and is
saved in the respected BCE.
If the LMA receives handoff-triggered Binding Lifetime Extension
Proxy Binding Update message without the GRE key option for a BCE
that is using GRE keys and GRE encapsulation, the LMA MUST reject the
Proxy Binding Update by sending a Proxy Binding Acknowledgement
message with the status field is set to <GRE KEY OPTION REQUIRED> as
defined in Section 6.2.
If the LMA receives a no handoff Binding Lifetime extension Proxy
Binding Update message with the GRE key option and the downlink GRE
key included from the same MAG that is currently hosting the
respected binding current pCoA, the LMA MUST NOT reject the Proxy
Binding Update because of the GRE key option being included in a
binding reregistration Proxy Binding Update message. In this case,
the LMA processes the Proxy Binding Update normally and if the
included downlink GRE key is different than the one saved in the
respected BCE, the LMA MUST update the BCE with the new downlink GRE
key.
4. Mobile Access Gateway Considerations
4.1. Extensions to the Conceptual Data Structure
Every mobile access gateway maintains a Binding Update List entry for
each currently attached mobile node, as explained in Section 6.1 of
the Proxy Mobile IPv6 specification [RFC5213]. To support this
specification, the conceptual Binding Update List entry data
structure must be extended with the following three new additional
fields.
o A flag indicating whether GRE encapsulation is enabled for the
mobile node's traffic flows.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
o The Downlink GRE Key used in the GRE encapsulation header of the
tunneled packet from the local mobility anchor to the mobile
access gateway that is destined to the mobile node. This GRE Key
is generated by the MAG and communicated to the LMA in the GRE Key
option in the Proxy Binding Update message.
o The Uplink GRE Key used in the GRE encapsulation header of the
tunneled packet from the mobile access gateway to the local
mobility anchor that is originating from the mobile node. This
GRE Key is obtained from the GRE Key Identifier field of the GRE
Key option present in the received Proxy Binding Acknowledgement
message sent by the LMA as specified in this document.
4.2. Operational Summary
o If the MAG determines that GRE encapsulation and GRE key is
required, the MAG MUST include the GRE Key option with the
downlink GRE key in the GRE Key Identifier field in the Proxy
Binding Update message that is sent by the mobile access gateway
to the local mobility anchor.
o After receiving a successful Proxy Binding Acknowledgment message
with the GRE Key option which includes the uplink GRE key, the
mobile access gateway MUST update the related three fields in the
mobile node Binding Update List entry described in Section 4.1.
Additionally, the MAG MUST use the assigned uplink GRE Key for
tunneling all the traffic originating from the mobile node before
forwarding the tunneled traffic to the LMA.
o If the mobile access gateway included the GRE Key option in the
Proxy Binding Update for a specific mobile node and the local
mobility anchor accepts the Proxy Binding Update by sending a
Proxy Binding Acknowledgement with a status code <SUCCESS> or any
status code that is less than 128 other than <GRE KEY OPTION NOT
REQUIRED>, the mobile access gateway MUST consider that the local
mobility anchor does not support GRE Key option as per this
specification. The mobile access gateway SHOULD NOT include the
GRE Key option in any subsequent Proxy Binding Update message that
is sent to that LMA.
o If the mobile access gateway sent a Proxy Binding Update message
without the GRE Key option, but the received Proxy Binding
Acknowledgement has the Status Code <GRE KEY OPTION REQUIRED>,
indicating that the GRE encapsulation and GRE key is required, the
mobile access gateway SHOULD resend the Proxy Binding Update
message with the GRE Key option. If the MAG does not support the
GRE Key option, the MAG MAY log the event and possibly raise an
alarm to indicate a possible misconfiguration.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
o If the mobile access gateway sent a Proxy Binding Update message
with the GRE Key option and the downlink GRE key included and
received a successful Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message with a
status code <GRE KEY OPTION NOT REQUIRED>, the mobile access
gateway MUST consider that GRE encapsulation and GRE keys is not
required for this specific binding. The MAG follows the Proxy
Mobile IPv6 specification [RFC5213] for the handling of uplink and
downlink traffic for this mobile node binding and MUST NOT include
the GRE Key option in any subsequent Proxy Binding Update message
for this specific mobile node that are sent to that LMA.
o If the MAG sent a re-registration Proxy Binding Update message
without the GRE Key option, but received a successful Proxy
Binding Acknowledgement which includes the GRE Key option with the
uplink GRE key, the MAG MUST compare the received uplink GRE key
with the one saved in the respected Binding Update List entry and
update it if the received uplink GRE key is different.
o If the MAG has successfully negotiated and exchanged the initial
GRE keys with the LMA for a specific binding, the MAG SHOULD NOT
include the GRE Key option in the de-registration Proxy Binding
Update.
o On receiving a packet from the tunnel with the GRE encapsulation
header, the mobile access gateway MUST use the GRE Key to
determine the necessary special processing for the data packet,
e.g., lookup the mobile node's layer-2 address, determine any
special processing or treatment for the data packet flow, then
remove the encapsulation header before forwarding the packet.
5. Local Mobility Anchor Considerations
5.1. Extensions to the Binding Cache Entry
When the local mobility anchor and the mobile access gateway
successfully negotiates GRE encapsulation and exchange downlink and
uplink GRE keys, the local mobility anchor MUST maintain the downlink
and uplink GRE keys as part of the mobile node BCE. This requires
that the BCE described in section 5.1 of the Proxy Mobile IPv6 base
specification [RFC5213] to be extended. To support this
specification, the BCE must be extended with the following three
additional fields.
o A flag indicating whether GRE encapsulation is enabled for the
mobile node's traffic flows.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
o The Downlink GRE Key, assigned by the MAG and used in the GRE
encapsulation header of the tunneled packet from the local
mobility anchor to the mobile access gateway.
o The Uplink GRE Key, assigned by the LMA and used in the GRE
encapsulation header of the tunneled packet from the mobile access
gateway to the local mobility anchor.
5.2. Operational Summary
o After successfully processes a Proxy Binding Update message with
the GRE Key option which includes a downlink GRE key in the GRE
Key Identifier field for Initial GRE Key exchange as in
Section 3.3.1, the local mobility anchor MUST include the GRE Key
option with the uplink GRE key in the GRE Key Identifier field
when responding with a successful Proxy Binding Acknowledgement
message.
o If the GRE tunneling is negotiated and the downlink and uplink GRE
keys have been exchanged between the mobile access gateway and the
local mobility anchor for a specific binding, the local mobility
anchor MUST use the negotiated downlink GRE key in the GRE header
of every packet that is destined to the mobile node of this
specific binding over the GRE tunnel to the mobile access gateway.
o If the received Proxy Binding Update message does not contain the
GRE Key option, and if the local mobility anchor determines that
GRE encapsulation and GRE key is required, e.g., overlapping IPv4
private addressing is in use, LMA local policy or LMA-MAG peer
policy, the local mobility anchor MUST reject the request and send
the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message to the mobile access
gateway with the status code <GRE KEY OPTION REQUIRED> as defined
in Section 6.2, indicating that GRE encapsulation and GRE key is
required.
o If after receiving Proxy Binding Update message with the GRE Key
option and successfully processes the Proxy Binding Update, the
local mobility anchor determines that GRE encapsulation and key
exchange is not required for this specific binding, e.g., private
IPv4 addressing is not in use, the LMA MUST send a Proxy Binding
Acknowledgement message to the MAG with the status code <GRE KEY
OPTION NOT REQUIRED>. The local mobility anchor MUST NOT include
the GRE Key option.
o If the local mobility anchor successfully processes a
deregistration Proxy Binding Update message which contains a GRE
Key option with a downlink GRE key included, the LMA follows the
same deregistration process as per the base Proxy Mobile IPv6
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
specification [RFC5213] to clean the binding cache entry and all
associated resources including the downlink and uplink GRE keys.
o On receiving a packet from the tunnel with the GRE encapsulation
header, the local mobility anchor MUST use the GRE Key present in
the GRE extension header to determine the necessary special
processing for the data packet, e.g., lookup the mobile node's
home gateway address, determine any special processing or
treatment for the data packet flow, then remove the encapsulation
header before forwarding the packet.
6. Message Formats
This section defines an extension to the Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775]
protocol messages for supporting the GRE tunneling and GRE Key
exchange for Proxy Mobile IPv6.
6.1. GRE Key Option
A new mobility option, the GRE Key option, is defined for use in the
Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding Acknowledgment messages
exchanged between the mobile access gateway and the local mobility
anchor. This option can be used for negotiating GRE encapsulation
mode and exchanging the downlink and uplink GRE keys that can be used
by the peers in all GRE encapsulated packets for marking that
specific mobile node's data flow.
The alignment requirement for this option is 4n.
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 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| GRE Key Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: GRE Key Option
Type
<IANA>
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
Length
8-bit unsigned integer indicating the length in octets of the
option, excluding the type and length fields. If the Length field
is set to 2, it indicates that the GRE key is not being carried in
the option. If the length field is set to a value of 6, it means
that either the downlink or the uplink GRE key is carried.
Reserved
These fields are unused. They MUST be initialized to zero by the
sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.
GRE Key Identifier
32-bit field containing the Downlink or the Uplink GRE Key. This
field is present in the GRE Key option only if the GRE keys are
being exchanged using the Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding
Acknowledgement messages.
6.2. Status Codes
The following status code values are defined for use in the Binding
Acknowledgment message when using Proxy Mobile IPv6.
GRE KEY OPTION NOT REQUIRED (TBD less than 128)
When the local mobility anchor receives a Proxy Binding Update
with the GRE Key option while the GRE encapsulation is not
required for this specific mobile node, the LMA uses this code to
indicate to the mobile access gateway that the Proxy Binding
Update has been processed successfully but GRE Encapsulation and
GRE Key is not required.
GRE KEY OPTION REQUIRED (TBD more than 128)
When the local mobility anchor receives a Proxy Binding Update
without the GRE Key option while the GRE encapsulation is required
for this specific mobile node, the local mobility anchor uses this
code to reject the Proxy Binding Update and indicate to the mobile
access gateway that GRE Encapsulation and Keys is required.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
7. IANA Considerations
This document defines a new Mobility Option, the GRE Key Option,
described in Section 6.1. This option is carried in the Mobility
Header. The type value for this option needs to be assigned from the
same numbering space as allocated for the other mobility options
defined in the Mobile IPv6 specification [RFC3775].
This document also defines two new Binding Acknowledgement status
codes as described in Section 6.2 and requests that these two codes
be allocated with numeric values as specified in Section 6.2 from the
"Status Codes" registry of the Mobility IPv6 Parameters located at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/mobility-parameters.
8. Security Considerations
The GRE Key Option, defined in this document, that can be carried in
Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding Acknowledgement messages,
reveals the group affiliation of a mobile node identified by its NAI
or an IP address. It may help an attacker in targeting flows
belonging to a specific group. This vulnerability can be prevented,
by enabling confidentiality protection on the Proxy Binding Update
and Proxy Binding Acknowledgement messages where the presence of the
NAI and GRE Key Options establish a mobile node's relation to a
specific group. This vulnerability can also be avoided by enabling
confidentiality protection on all the tunneled data packets between
the mobile access gateway and the local mobility anchor, for hiding
all the markings.
9. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Alessio Casati, Barney Barnowski,
Mark Grayson and Parviz Yegani for their input on the need for this
option. The authors would like to thank Charlie Perkins, Curtis
Provost, Irfan Ali, Jouni Korhonen, Julien Langanier, Kuntal
Chowdhury, Suresh Krishnan, and Vijay Devarapalli for their review
and comments.
10. Normative References
[ID-PMIP6-IPv4]
Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-05
(work in progress), September 2008.
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
[RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.
[RFC2003] Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003,
October 1996.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2473] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in
IPv6 Specification", RFC 2473, December 1998.
[RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P.
Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784,
March 2000.
[RFC2890] Dommety, G., "Key and Sequence Number Extensions to GRE",
RFC 2890, September 2000.
[RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.
[RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.
Authors' Addresses
Ahmad Muhanna
Nortel
2221 Lakeside Blvd.
Richardson, TX 75082
USA
Email: amuhanna@nortel.com
Mohamed Khalil
Nortel
2221 Lakeside Blvd.
Richardson, TX 75082
USA
Email: mkhalil@nortel.com
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
Sri Gundavelli
Cisco Systems
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: sgundave@cisco.com
Kent Leung
Cisco Systems
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: kleung@cisco.com
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft GRE Key Option for Proxy MIPv6 October 2008
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
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.
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, THE IETF TRUST 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.
Intellectual Property
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.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Muhanna, et al. Expires April 10, 2009 [Page 16]
