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]