[Search] [txt|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02                                                      
NEMO Working Group                                                 C. Ng
Internet-Draft                                  Panasonic Singapore Labs
Expires: January 7, 2008                                    July 6, 2007


      Consumer Electronics Requirements for Network Mobility Route
                              Optimization
                        draft-ng-nemo-ce-req-00

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 January 7, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).














Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


Abstract

   This document illustrates different deployments of Network Mobility
   (NEMO) from the consumer electronics perspective.  From these
   deployments, a set of requirements is deduced for Route Optimization
   (RO) with NEMO.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Deployments of Personal Mobile Router  . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.1.  Simple Personal Area Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.2.  Personal Mobile Router in a Car  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     2.3.  Residence Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.  Consumer Electronics Requirements for Route Optimization . . .  7
   4.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     6.1.  Normative Reference  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     6.2.  Informative Reference  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   Appendix A.  Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12



























Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


1.  Introduction

   Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support [3] allows a whole network to
   change its point of attachment while maintaining reachability and
   session continuity. [4] and [5] investigate the inefficiencies in
   NEMO Basic Support, and analyze the solution space for Route
   Optimization (RO) with NEMO from a technical perspective.

   This document explores the different deployment scenarios of NEMO
   from the perspective of consumer electronics.  This mainly entails a
   personal device, called the Personal Mobile Router, as the primary
   node which a user utilizes to allow the user's other devices to
   communicate with other nodes in the global Internet.  This is
   detailed in Section 2.  From these deployments, a set of requirements
   is inferred in Section 3.

   It is expected for readers to be familiar with terminologies related
   to mobility in [1] and NEMO related terms defined in [2].  Interested
   readers may also refer to [6] and [7] for the requirements from the
   automobile and aviation industries respectively.































Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


2.  Deployments of Personal Mobile Router

   The Personal Mobile Router is generally envisaged as a mobile
   communications device, most probably a cellular handphone, with
   embedded router functionality so as to allow other personal devices
   (such as MP3 Players, Digital Cameras) to access the global Internet.
   In such a deployment, it is expected for the Personal Mobile Router
   to provide all the routing capabilities of the personal area network.
   This means that one would generally not expect devices (i.e.  LFNs)
   such as digital camera or music players to have routing capabilities.
   In other words, LFNs are envisaged as simple IPv6 hosts.

   However, it is possible for there to be a Local Mobile Node (MNN) in
   the personal area network.  For instance, a laptop or a WLAN-enabled
   PDA can break off from the personal area network and connect to the
   Internet on its own.  Thus, the device becomes a MIPv6 host, with its
   home address configured from the Mobile Network Prefix of the
   personal area network.

   This section illustrates three different deployment scenarios with
   respect to the Personal Mobile Router.  First is a simple personal
   area network where NEMO services is provided by a service provider
   (such as an telecommunications operator).  Next is the deployment
   where the Personal Mobile Router is docked within a car and serves as
   an additional Mobile Router for the car network.  The last scenario
   is the case where the Personal Mobile Router obtains a network prefix
   not directly from its Internet service providers.  Instead, the
   network prefix is allocated from the user's residence.


2.1.  Simple Personal Area Network

   The simplest deployment is when the Personal Mobile Router is simply
   used to provide Internet access to other devices in a user's personal
   area network.  This is the case where the user subscribes to a
   mobility service provider that allocates a network prefix for the
   user's personal area network.  One example of this is the 3GPP
   Personal Network Management services [8].

   For this scenario, typical communications will be audio/video
   streaming from a multimedia content server to the music/video player
   in the user's personal area network.  This is a case of
   communications between a LFN with a CN in the global internet.

   An alternative situation will be communications between devices from
   two (or more) different personal area networks.  For example, two
   different users may engage in a game with their personal
   entertainment devices (such as Nintendo or Play Station portables),



Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


   or share their audio files stored in their music players.  This is a
   case of communications between two LFNs from different NEMO.

2.2.  Personal Mobile Router in a Car

   A second scenario involving the Personal Mobile Router is when the
   user docks the Personal Mobile Router into a car network.  This
   allows the communications devices in the vehicle to use the Personal
   Mobile Router to access information from the Internet.  It also
   allows the personal devices in the personal area network to use the
   Mobile Router in the vehicle network to communicate with
   correspondent nodes on the Internet.  In other words, the two mobile
   networks (personal area network and vehicle network) merges to form a
   multihomed network.

   In such a merged network, the vehicle network devices and the
   personal area network devices will continue to use their own original
   network prefixes to communicate with external nodes.  Hence, one way
   to view this is to treat it as if the two Mobile Routers attaches to
   each other, and uses each other as an additional access router.  This
   implies that the a communication between a MNN and a correspondent
   node may go through two Mobile Routers (e.g. the communication from
   the car navigation device to a traffic condition server passes
   through first the Mobile Router of the car, and then the Personal
   Mobile Router).  Hence, this can be viewed as a case of a nested
   NEMO.

2.3.  Residence Home Network

   This scenario is a special deployment as it differs from the usual
   subscription model than is more commonly used.  Basically, in this
   scenario, the home network of the Personal Mobile Router (as far as
   NEMO is concerned) is literally the "home" -- i.e. the residence of
   the user.  It is envisioned that the user deploys a residence-wide
   network with a set-top box serving as the gateway.  This set-top box
   is connected to the Internet via broadband connection (cable or ADSL)
   and obtains an IPv6 prefix from the ISP.  Part of the IPv6 prefix
   obtained is then assigned as the prefix for the user's personal are
   network (i.e. the Mobile Network Prefix for the personal area
   network).  The set-top box is thus configured as the home agent of
   the Personal Mobile Router.

   Typically, the devices in the personal area network (i.e.  LFNs)
   would communicate mostly with other devices in the residence network
   (e.g. personal video player accessing movie stored in a digital video
   recorder in the residence).  In such situation, route optimization is
   redundant.  However, there exist situations where multiple personal
   area networks (each belonging to different family members) belong to



Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


   the same residence network.  Devices from these different personal
   area networks may communicate with each other often enough.  In the
   latter situation, it is a case of two MNNs from different NEMO
   communicating with each other.















































Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


3.  Consumer Electronics Requirements for Route Optimization

   Not all communications involving personal area network require route
   optimization.  There are, however, two particular use cases where
   route optimization is highly desirable.  The first use case is when
   devices in a personal area network are used for real time interactive
   applications which are sensitive to round trip delays.  Examples
   include voice-over-IP communications and multiplayer gaming sessions.
   This usually entails communications between two devices from two
   different personal area network, as illustrated in Section 2.1 and
   Section 2.3.  In such cases, there might be two different home agents
   involved (one for each NEMO), hence making the improvement in delay
   reduction of route optimization more significant.  The second use
   case is when the home network is congested, or otherwise bandwidth-
   limited.  One example is the residence home network as described in
   Section 2.3.  Most broadband residence access are asymmetrical (i.e.
   the uplink bandwidth is much smaller than the downlink bandwidth),
   making it unsuitable for the home agent (e.g. set-top box) to forward
   large amount of packets to Personal Mobile Routers.

   Where route optimization is highly desirable, we can infer the
   following requirements/features from the deployment scenarios
   described in Section 2.

   o  LFNs should remain unmodified

      Devices in the personal area network are envisaged as simple IPv6
      node.  The Personal Mobile Router is expected to provide route
      optimization services for any consumer electronic devices that
      connect to its personal area network.  Thus, it is expected for
      LFNs to be unmodified for route optimizations.

   o  Processing load of MR should be as low as possible

      The Personal Mobile Router is a small mobile device (e.g.
      handphone) that is limited in battery power.  Hence, any route
      optimization solution should not significantly increases the
      processing load of the MR.

   o  MR-to-MR route optimization

      As seen in Section 2, most of the communications we envisaged are
      in the form of a MNN communicating with another MNN in different
      personal area networks.  As we do not expect MNNs to be involved
      in route optimization signaling, a suitable route optimization
      would likely be between the two MRs.





Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


   o  Nested-NEMO route optimization

      In Section 2.2, a scenario is illustrated where the Personal
      Mobile Router is attaching to the car mobile router for Internet
      access (and vice versa).  If the car mobile router performs route
      optimization for its network, then the Personal Mobile Router can
      run a separate route optimization session to achieve fully-
      optimized route.  Alternatively, it is also possible for the
      Personal Mobile Router to support some mechanism that achieve
      nested-NEMO route optimization.

   o  Security Consideration

      Security is a prime consideration in the deployment of Personal
      Mobile Router, since the personal area network may store private
      information.  In general, a personal area network would not allow
      external devices to attach to the mobile network, hence the
      Personal Mobile Router will the most important gateway in which
      security of the personal area network is enforced.  As such, any
      route optimization solution should not expose the Personal Mobile
      Router to additional risk as compared to NEMO Basic Support.

      Particularly, it must not be possible for other nodes to claim
      ownership of the Mobile Network Prefix (in entirety or in parts).
      Additionally, denail-of service attacks on the Personal Mobile
      Router (e.g. by forcing the Personal Mobile Router to send a huge
      amount of signaling packets or to maintain a large number of
      signaling states) must not be possible.























Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


4.  IANA Considerations

   This is an informational document and does not require any IANA
   action.



5.  Security Considerations

   Security is a prime consideration in the deployment of Personal
   Mobile Router.  The requirements for security involving the Personal
   Mobile Router is discussed in Section 3.



6.  References

6.1.  Normative Reference

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

   [2]  Ernst, T. and H. Lach, "Network Mobility Support Terminology",
        draft-ietf-nemo-terminology-05 (work in progress), March 2006.

6.2.  Informative Reference

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

   [4]  Ng, C., Thubert, P., Watari, M., and F. Zhao, "Network Mobility
        Route Optimization Problem Statement",
        draft-ietf-nemo-ro-problem-statement-03 (work in progress),
        September 2006.

   [5]  Ng, C., Thubert, P., Zhao, F., and M. Watari, "Network Mobility
        Route Optimization Solution Space Analysis",
        draft-ietf-nemo-ro-space-analysis-02 (work in progress),
        February 2006.

   [6]  Baldessari, R., "C2C-C Consortium Requirements for Usage of NEMO
        in VANETs", draft-baldessari-c2ccc-nemo-req-00 (work in
        progress), February 2007.

   [7]  Eddy, W., "NEMO Route Optimization Requirements for Operational
        Use in Aeronautics and  Space Exploration Mobile Networks",
        draft-eddy-nemo-aero-reqs-00 (work in progress), April 2007.



Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


   [8]  "Service requirements for Personal Network Management (PNM)",
        3GPP TS 22.259, June 2006.


Appendix A.  Change Log

   o  draft-ng-nemo-ro-req-00:

      *  Initial version.










































Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


Author's Address

   Chan-Wah Ng
   Panasonic Singapore Laboratories Pte Ltd
   Blk 1022 Tai Seng Ave #06-3530
   Tai Seng Industrial Estate
   Singapore  534415
   SG

   Phone: +65 65505420
   Email: chanwah.ng@sg.panasonic.com








































Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft            NEMO CE Requirements                 July 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   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).





Ng                       Expires January 7, 2008               [Page 12]