Concluded WG IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming (mobike)
Note: The data for concluded WGs is occasionally incorrect.
| WG | Name | IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acronym | mobike | ||
| Area | Security Area (sec) | ||
| State | Concluded | ||
| Charter | charter-ietf-mobike-01 Approved | ||
| Document dependencies | |||
| Additional resources | Additional MOBIKE Web Page | ||
| Personnel | Chair | Paul E. Hoffman | |
| Secretary | Pasi Eronen | ||
| Mailing list | Address | mobike@machshav.com | |
| To subscribe | https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike | ||
| Archive | https://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/ |
Final Charter for Working Group
The IKE Mobility working group will focus on the extensions to the
IKEv2 protocol required to enable its use in the context where there
are multiple IP addresses per host (multihoming, SCTP) or where the IP
addresses changes in the control of the IPsec host (mobility and
roaming).
The main scenario is making it possible for a VPN user to move from
one address to another without re-establishing all security
associations, or to use multiple interfaces simultaenously, such as
where WLAN and GPRS are used simultaneously. It is also intended that
the extensions produced by the WG would address specific needs related
to other work in IETF, such as modification of SCTP end points without
renegotiation of the security associations or the movement of
IKEv2-based secure connections to enable Mobile IP signaling to take
place.
An explicit non-goal is the construction of a fully fledged mobility
protocol. In particular, the WG shall NOT develop mechanisms for the
following functions:
o Hiding of mobility from transport layer protocols or applications
(beyond what already exists through the use of the tunnel mode). In
this respect MOBIKE is different from Mobile IP, HIP, and other
mobility protocols.
o IP address changes done by third parties (NATs, firewalls etc). In
particular, MOBIKE shall not replace or modify IKEv2 NAT traversal
function. MOBIKE handles IP address changes initiated by one of the
endpoints of the security associations. NAT traversal handles other
address changes. MOBIKE should not be tightly coupled with the NAT
traversal function, but it is necessary to specify in which cases
(if any) they can be used together, and how they interact.
o Opportunistic authentication or other tools for the reduction of
configuration effort. The mechanisms specified in this WG are to be
designed for the traditional VPN use case only.
o Any optimization of packet routing paths due to mobility.
o Load balancing. Multihoming is supported only in the sense of
failing over to another interface; sending traffic over multiple
addresses using the same SA is not supported.
o Use of IKEv1.
Work Items
The goals of the MOBIKE working group are to address the
following issues:
(1) IKEv2 mobile IP support for IKE SAs. Support for changing and
authenticating the IKE SA endpoints IP addresses as requested by
the host.
(2) Updating IPsec SA gateway addresses. Support for changing the IP
address associated to the tunnel mode IPsec SAs already in
place, so that further traffic is sent to the new gateway
address.
(3) Multihoming support for IKEv2. Support for multiple IP addresses
for IKEv2 SAs, and IPsec SAs created by the IKEv2. This should
also include support for the multiple IP address for SCTP
transport. This should also work together with the first two
items, i.e those addresses should be able to be updated too.
(4) Verification of changed or added IP addresses. Provide way to
verify IP address either using static information, information
from certificates, or through the use of a return routability
mechanism.
(5) Reduction of header overhead involved with mobility-related
tunnels. This is a performance requirement in wireless
environments.
(6) Specification of PFKEY extensions to support the IPsec SA
movements and tunnel overhead reduction.
Milestones
| Date | Milestone | Associated documents |
|---|---|---|
| May 2006 | Submit PFKEY Extension for Address Updates document to IESG for Informational RFC | |
| May 2006 | Publish first draft on 'Reduced Tunnel Overhead Mode for IPsec' (issue 5 above) | |
| Jan 2006 | Publish first draft on 'PFKEY Extension for Address Updates' (issue 6 above) | |
| Jan 2006 | Submit Reduced Tunnel Overhead Mode for IPsec to IESG forInformational RFC |
Done milestones
| Date | Milestone | Associated documents |
|---|---|---|
| Done | Submit IKEv2 Address Update document to IESG for Proposed Standard RFC | |
| Done | Publish first draft on 'IKEv2 Address Update', covering issues 1 to 4 from the above list |