Diameter Maintenance and                                      M. Liebsch
Extensions (DIME)                                            P. Loureiro
Internet-Draft                                                       NEC
Intended status: Standards Track                             J. Korhonen
Expires: September 5, 2009                         Nokia Siemens Network
                                                           March 4, 2009


              Local Mobility Anchor Resolution for PMIPv6
               draft-liebsch-dime-pmip6-lmaresolve-00.txt

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and 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 September 5, 2009.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   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.






Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


Abstract

   The IETF is specifying a new Diameter Application to support mobility
   service authorization and home network prefix allocation for Proxy
   Mobile IPv6.  The protocol operates between a Local Mobility Anchor
   and a AAA server.  Furthermore, the associated specification extends
   the existing protocol for network access service to support dynamic
   assignment and discovery of a Local Mobility Anchor during the
   authentication procedure.  The AAA server maintains mobile nodes'
   profile in a policy store, which includes information about the
   assigned Local Mobility Anchor as well as the home network prefix.
   This document proposes an extension to the Diameter PMIPv6
   Application to allow Local Mobility Anchors benefit from the AAA
   server's policy store and resolve an unknown mobile node's IP address
   into a routable address of its assigned Local Mobility Anchor.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions and Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Problem Statement and Reference Architecture . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  LMA Resolution Extension to the Diameter PMIPv6 Application  .  9
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   6.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     7.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16






















Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


1.  Introduction

   The IETF specified Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) [RFC5213] as solution
   for network-based localized mobility management.  While in host
   mobility solutions, such as Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775], the mobile node
   (MN) takes care about updating its routing state on a mobility
   anchor, in PMIPv6 a Mobility Access Gateway (MAG) recognizes an
   attachment of an MN and takes over the role of registering the MN at
   a selected Local Mobility Anchor (LMA).

   The base PMIPv6 protocol as per [RFC5213] specifies protocol
   operation between a MAG and an LMA for registration, de-registration
   and handover.  The LMA is under control of assigning a unique IP
   address prefix (Home Network Prefix, HNP) to a registering MN and
   performs prefix-based forwarding of downlink data packets according
   to the MN's binding cache entry (BCE).  The MAG, which performed the
   registration of the MN by means of sending a Proxy Binding Update
   (PBU) to the responsible LMA, is referred to as proxy care-of-address
   for the MN and the LMA forwards downlink data packets to the MN's MAG
   through an IP tunnel.  The MAG forwards the packets to the MN by
   means of link mechanisms.

   [RFC5213] considers selection of a responsible LMA as well as sources
   for the assignment of an HNP to a registering MN at the LMA out of
   scope.  [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] specifies extensions to the Network
   Access Server (NAS), which is collocated with a MAG in the access
   network, to retrieve an MN's policy profile and LMA information from
   a AAA server during access authentication.  Furthermore, a new
   Diameter application is specified for mobility service authorization
   and prefix delegation and applies to the interface between an LMA and
   the AAA server.

   As MNs get assigned a unique prefix during the PMIPv6 registration
   and associated IP addresses may be from a virtual address space and
   remain anchored at the LMA, there is no efficient means to resolve an
   MN's virtual IP address into the routable address of the MN's LMA.
   This may be needed to support different use cases in a PMIPv6 domain,
   which utilizes multiple LMAs for load sharing or other purposes.  Two
   exemplary use cases are referred to in Section 3.

   This document proposes a mechanism which extends the PMIPv6 Diameter
   application as per [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] to support the resolution of
   an MN's virtual IP address into the associated LMA's routable IP
   address.







Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


2.  Conventions 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].














































Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


3.  Problem Statement and Reference Architecture

   Addressing of MNs in PMIPv6 [RFC5213] is based on the assignment of
   individual Home Network Prefixes to an MN during its registration
   with an LMA.  An LMA may use a local prefix pool, DHCP or other means
   to retrieve a valid and unique HNP for an MN.  In large PMIPv6
   domains, multiple LMAs will serve MNs to ensure load distribution.
   In case of local communication within the PMIPv6 domain or even
   beyond a single PMIPv6 domain, a particular LMA has only forwarding
   information for destination MNs, which are registered with this
   particular LMA.  For unknown destination prefixes, the LMA may
   forward data to a default gateway.

   In some scenarios it may be useful or even necessary for one LMA to
   discover the LMA of the destination MN.  Hence, an LMA needs to
   resolve the destination MN's virtual IP address into the routable IP
   address of the destination MN's LMA.  Figure 1 depicts this problem
   for the communication between MN1 and MN2, which are registered with
   LMA1 and LMA2 respectively.  The reference architecture of this
   document assumes a NAS being collocated with the MAG on an access
   router, which performs Diameter protocol operation with a AAA server
   for access authentication and LMA discovery according to
   [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] (B1,B2 interface of Figure 1).  Furthermore,
   the architecture assumes a Diameter client on each LMA for mobility
   service authorization and HNP delegation according to
   [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] (A1,A2 interface of Figure 1).

























Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


                                +---------+
                +-------------->| AAA &   |<--------------+
                |         +---->| Policy  |<----+         |
                |         |     | Profile |     |         |
                |     Diameter  +---------+   Diameter    |
                |        A1                     A2        |
                |         |                     |         |
             Diameter     v                     v      Diameter
                B1       +----+  LMA2?      +----+        B2
                |        |LMA1| ------>     |LMA2|        |
                |        +----+             +----+        |
                |          |                  |           |
                |         //                  \\          |
                |        //                    \\         |
                |       //                      \\        |
                |       |                        |        |
                |     +----+                   +----+     |
                +---->|MAG1|                   |MAG2|<----+
                      +----+                   +----+
                         :                        :
                      +---+                     +---+
                      |MN1|                     |MN2|
                      +---+                     +---+


                     Figure 1: Reference architecture

   Exemplary use cases for the resolution of an MN's (virtual) IP
   address into the anchor's node are as follows:

   o  Local Routing: Two MNs, MN1 and MN2, which are attached to the
      same PMIPv6 domain but are registered with different LMAs, LMA1
      and LMA2, communicate with each other.  MN1 sends data to MN2
      through its LMA1.  Dependent on the nature of MN2's IP address
      prefix, LMA1 needs to resolve MN2's virtual IP address into a
      routable IP address, such as LMA2's address.  LMA1 can use LMA2's
      IP address as forwarding information.

   o  Route Optimization Signaling: The IETF is planning a new working
      group to specify extensions to PMIPv6 for Route Optimization
      [I-D.liebsch-netext-pmip6-ro-ps].  Associated scenarios include
      the communication between two MNs, MN1 and MN2, which are attached
      to the same PMIPv6 domain but are registered with different LMAs,
      LMA1 and LMA2.  Protocol solutions for route optimization may
      require signaling between the two LMAs within the same PMIPv6
      domain to set up a direct forwarding path between the two MNs'
      MAGs.  As a result, data packets between the two MNs can be
      forwarded locally without traversing any LMA.  In such case, LMA1



Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


      may need to resolve MN2's virtual IP address into LMA2's routable
      IP address.  LMA1 can now send signaling messages to LMA2.

   [RFC5213] assumes that the LMA is responsible for assigning an HNP to
   the MN during the PMIPv6 registration, but means to determine a
   unique HNP are out of scope of the specification.
   [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] specifies extensions to network access service
   to retrieve information about a responsible LMA for an MN during the
   MN's authentication procedure.  Furthermore, a new Diameter PMIPv6
   Application is specified to operate between an LMA, which implements
   a Diameter client, and the AAA server.  The Diameter PMIPv6
   Application is used to authorize mobility service for an MN after an
   LMA received a Proxy Binding Update (PBU) from the MN's MAG and to
   retrieve a valid and unique HNP for the MN from the AAA server.

   Figure 2 depicts the registration procedure of MN1 with LMA1 and of
   MN2 with LMA2 according to [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6].  MN1 attaches to
   MAG1, whereas MN2 attaches to MAG2.  As a result of mobility service
   authorization, MN1 gets assigned HNP1, whereas MN2 gets assigned
   HNP2.































Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


   +---+  +---+ +----+ +----+   +----+               +---+        +----+
   |MN1|  |MN2| |MAG1| |MAG2|   |LMA1|               |AAA|        |LMA2|
   +---+  +---+ +----+ +----+   +----+               +---+        +----+
     |      |    |       |        |                    |               |
     |      |    |       |        |                    |               |
     |- attach- -|       |        |                    |               |
     |      |    |-----AA-Request[MN1]---------------->|               |
     |      |    |<----AA-Answer[LMA1]-----------------|               |
     |      |    |----PBU[MN1]--->|                    |               |
     |      |    |       |        |--LHA-Req[MN1]----->|               |
     |      |    |       |        |<-LHA-Answer[HNP1]--|               |
     |      |    |<---PBA[HNP1]---|                    |               |
     |      |    |       |        |                    |               |
     |      |- -attach - |        |                    |               |
     |      |    |       |----------AA-Request[MN2]--->|               |
     |      |    |       |<---------AA-Answer[LMA2]----|               |
     |      |    |       |-------------PBU[MN2]----------------------->|
     |      |    |       |        |                    |<-LHA-Req[MN2]-|
     |      |    |       |        |                    |-LHA-Ans[HNP2]>|
     |      |    |       |<------------PBA[HNP2]-----------------------|
     |      |    |       |        |                    |               |
     |      |    |       |        |                    |               |
     |      |    |       |        |                    |               |


   Figure 2: MN Authentication, LMA discovery, service authorization and
                 Prefix delegation in a multi-LMA scenario
























Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


4.  LMA Resolution Extension to the Diameter PMIPv6 Application

   According to [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6], the AAA server is a suitable
   entity to maintain MNs' profile information and to store further
   dynamically assigned information during an MN's mobility session.
   Such information includes the assigned LMA and the HNP, which has
   been assigned to the MN during access authorization.  This makes the
   AAA server a suitable information database for trusted Diameter
   clients to request some information from the policy store.

   This document proposes an extension to the Diameter PMIPv6
   Application as specified in [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] to support
   resolving an MN's HNP into its LMA's IP address by means of a new
   message type INFORMATION_REQUEST (InfoReq).  Any Diameter client,
   which is associated with the AAA server to operate according to the
   Diameter PMIPv6 Application, may send an INFORMATION_REQUEST to the
   AAA server, having the unknown MN's HNP or complete IP address
   included.  The AAA server performs a lookup in its policy store and a
   longest prefix match to resolve the HNP into the associated LMA's IP
   address.  Subsequently, the AAA server replies to the requesting
   Diameter client with an INFORMATION_RESPONSE (InfoResp), including
   the requested binding between the unknown MN's HNP and its assigned
   LMA's IP address.  Now, the requesting LMA can contact the unknown
   LMA directly for signaling reasons or take the resolved IP address as
   forwarding information for data packets.

   Figure 3 illustrates exemplarily the resolution of the IP address/HNP
   of MN2, which is registered with LMA2, into the IP address of LMA2
   with the help of the proposed LMA Resolution extension to the
   Diameter PMIPv6 Application.  MN1 sends a data packet to MN2, which
   traverses MN1's LMA1.  In case LMA1 needs to know a routable IP
   address of MN2's mobility anchor, LMA1 performs LMA Resolution with
   the AAA server to resolve MN2's IP address/HNP (IP MN2) into LMA2's
   IP address (IP LMA2).

















Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


    +---+     +----+         +----+                 +---+         +----+
    |MN1|     |MAG1|         |LMA1|                 |AAA|         |LMA2|
    +---+     +----+         +----+                 +---+         +----+
      |  data    |    data     |                      |              |
      |- - - - ->|-==========->|                      |              |
      |          |             |---InfoReq[IP MN2]--->|              |
      |          |             |                      |              |
      |          |             |<--InfoResp[IP LMA2]--|              |
      |          |             |                      |              |
      |          |             |-----data/signaling----------------->|
      |          |             |                      |              |
      |          |             |                      |              |




                 Figure 3: LMA resolution at a AAA server

   In large domains, multiple AAA servers may distribute load.  To
   assign a unique HNP to registering MNs, AAA servers may use
   administratively assigned prefix pools.  In such case, it may happen
   that an LMA tries to resolve an unknown MN's IP/HNP into the
   associated LMA's IP address, but the requested AAA server does not
   have an entry for the unknown MN as well.  Here, the concept of the
   Diameter redirect agent [RFC3588] may help to support LMA resolution
   beyond the scope of a single AAA server.  Such an architecture is
   illustrated in Figure 4.
























Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


                   +------------------------------------+
                   (                      AAA           )
                   (     +--------+     Backend         )
                   (     |Redirect|                     )
                   (     | Agent  |                     )
                   (     +--------+                     )
                   (         ^                          )
                   (         |                          )
                   (         |                          )
                   (         v                          )
                   (  +---------+          +---------+  )
                +---->| AAA1 &  |          | AAA2 &  |<---+
                |  (  | Policy  |<-------->| Policy  |  ) |
                |  (  | Profile |          | Profile |  ) |
                |  (  +---------+          +---------+  ) |
                |  (      ^                     ^       ) |
                |  +----- | ------------------- |-------+ |
                |         A1                    A2        |
                |         |                     |         |
                |         |                     |         |
             Diameter     v                     v      Diameter
                B1       +----+  LMA2 ?     +----+        B2
                |        |LMA1| ------>     |LMA2|        |
                |        +----+             +----+        |
                |          |                  |           |
                |         //                  \\          |
                |        //                    \\         |
                |       //                      \\        |
                |       |                        |        |
                |     +----+                   +----+     |
                +---->|MAG1|                   |MAG2|<----+
                      +----+                   +----+
                         :                        :
                      +---+                     +---+
                      |MN1|                     |MN2|
                      +---+                     +---+



   Figure 4: Use of a Diameter redirect agent to support LMA resolution
                   in networks with multiple AAA servers

   Referring to an architecture with multiple AAA servers according to
   Figure 4, AAA1 may not be able to resolve the HNP of MN2 into the IP
   address of LMA2, as AAA2 holds this information in its policy store.
   In such case, AAA1 contacts a Diameter redirect agent [RFC3588] to
   request the AAA server being responsible for the assignment from the
   address space where MN2's HNP belongs to.  The redirect agent informs



Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


   AAA1 about AAA2's address in a Redirection Notification message,
   which allows AAA1 to forward the INFORMATION_REQUEST to AAA2.  AAA2
   resolves MN2's HNP into the IP address of LMA2 and sends the results
   back in an INFORMATION_REPLY message to LMA2 via AAA1.  Details about
   the use of redirection agents in this context are for further study.














































Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


5.  Security Considerations

   As LMA resolution according to this draft is performed between a
   Diameter client on an LMA and the AAA server using the Diameter
   PMIPv6 Application according to [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6], an existing
   security association between the LMA and the AAA server can be
   assumed to protect the new signaling message.  One important
   difference to the existing operation of the Diameter PMIPv6
   Application according to [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6] is that the requesting
   LMA cannot include a Diameter Session-ID or the MNID of the MN, whose
   HNP should be resolved into an anchor address (MN2), in the
   INFORMATION_REQUEST message.  The AAA server must rather use the HNP
   or the IP address of MN2 as key to perform a lookup in its policy
   store.  Since the requesting Diameter client on the LMA and the AAA
   server share a trust relationship and associated signaling can be
   protected, there should be no security threat with such operation.



































Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


6.  Acknowledgments

   Many thanks to Rafael Richter for his valuable input on AAA-based
   anchor resolution.















































Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-dime-pmip6]
              Korhonen, J., Bournelle, J., Muhanna, A., Chowdhury, K.,
              and U. Meyer, "Diameter Proxy Mobile IPv6: Support For
              Mobile Access Gateway and Local  Mobility Anchor to
              Diameter Server Interaction", draft-ietf-dime-pmip6-00
              (work in progress), January 2009.

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

   [RFC3588]  Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J.
              Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003.

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

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.liebsch-netext-pmip6-ro-ps]
              Liebsch, M., "PMIPv6 Localized Routing Problem Statement",
              draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-ro-ps-00 (work in progress),
              February 2009.

   [RFC3775]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.






















Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft          LMA Resolution for PMIPv6             March 2009


Authors' Addresses

   Marco Liebsch
   NEC Laboratories Europe
   NEC Europe Ltd.
   Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
   69115 Heidelberg,
   Germany

   Phone: +49 6221 4342146
   Email: liebsch@nw.neclab.eu


   Paulo Loureiro
   NEC Laboratories Europe
   NEC Europe Ltd.
   Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
   69115 Heidelberg,
   Germany

   Phone: +49 6221 4342177
   Email: loureiro@nw.neclab.eu


   Jouni Korhonen
   Nokia Siemens Network
   Linnoitustie 6
   Espoo  FI-02600
   Finland

   Email: jouni.nospam@gmail.com




















Liebsch, et al.         Expires September 5, 2009              [Page 16]