Multi-homing for small scale fixed network Using Mobile IP and NEMO
RFC 4908

Document Type RFC - Experimental (June 2007; No errata)
Authors Kenichi Nagami  , Hiroyiki Ohnishi  , Satoshi Uda  , Ryuji Wakikawa  , Nobuo Ogashiwa  , Hiroshi Esaki 
Last updated 2015-10-14
Stream ISE
Formats plain text html pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream ISE state (None)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state RFC 4908 (Experimental)
Telechat date
Responsible AD Jari Arkko
Send notices to,
Network Working Group                                          K. Nagami
Request for Comments: 4908                                 INTEC NetCore
Category: Experimental                                            S. Uda
                                                             N. Ogashiwa
                                                            NOWARE, Inc.
                                                                H. Esaki
                                                     University of Tokyo
                                                             R. Wakikawa
                                                         Keio University
                                                              H. Ohnishi
                                                               June 2007

              Multihoming for Small-Scale Fixed Networks
              Using Mobile IP and Network Mobility (NEMO)

Status of This Memo

   This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
   community.  It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.
   Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).


   This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard.  The
   IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for any
   purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish is not
   based on IETF review for such things as security, congestion control,
   or inappropriate interaction with deployed protocols.  The RFC Editor
   has chosen to publish this document at its discretion.  Readers of
   this document should exercise caution in evaluating its value for
   implementation and deployment.  See RFC 3932 for more information.

Nagami, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 1]
RFC 4908             Multihoming for Fixed Network             June 2007


   Multihoming technology improves the availability of host and network
   connectivity.  Since the behaviors of fixed and mobile networks
   differ, distinct architectures for each have been discussed and
   proposed.  This document proposes a common architecture for both
   mobile and fixed networking environments, using mobile IP (RFC 3775)
   and Network Mobility (NEMO; RFC 3963).  The proposed architecture
   requires a modification of mobile IP and NEMO so that multiple Care-
   of Addresses (CoAs) can be used.  In addition, multiple Home Agents
   (HAs) that are located in different places are required for

1.  Motivation

   Users of small-scale networks need an easy method to improve network
   availability and to load balance several links.  Multihoming
   technology is one of the solutions to improve availability.
   Conventional major multihoming networks use BGP, but it has some
   issues.  Therefore, we propose a multihoming architecture using
   mobile IP [1] and NEMO [2] for small-scale fixed networks.

1.1.  General Benefits of Multihoming

   In a multihoming network environment, both users and network managers
   benefit from controlling outgoing traffic, incoming traffic, or both
   of them.  Those benefits are described in "Goals and Benefits of
   Multihoming" [3].  The following is a summary of those goals and

      o  Ubiquitous Access

      o  Redundancy/Fault-Recovery

      o  Load Sharing

      o  Load Balancing

      o  Bi-casting

      o  Preference Settings

1.2.  Problems to be Solved to Accomplish Multihoming

   Several multihoming technologies have been proposed so far.
   Conventional major multihoming networks use BGP, but it has some
   issues, as follows.

Nagami, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 2]
RFC 4908             Multihoming for Fixed Network             June 2007

   (1) Increasing route entries in the Internet

      In the multihoming environments, each user's network needs to
      advertise its address block to all ISPs connected to them.  If a
      multihomed user connects to only one ISP, the ISP can advertise
      routing information to aggregate them.  But some multihomed users
      need to connect with different ISPs to be prepared for ISP
      failure.  In this case, ISPs need to advertise routing information
      for multihomed users without aggregation.  Therefore, the number
      of routing entries in the Internet is increasing one by one.

   (2) Difficulty of using multiple links efficiently

      It is not easy to control incoming traffic in the case of the
      conventional multihoming architecture using BGP.  Therefore, load
      balancing of connected links is difficult.

1.3.  Using the Architecture of Mobile IP and NEMO to Solve the Problems

   Basically, mobile IP (MIP) and NEMO have been proposed for mobile
Show full document text