1 / 6

HMIPv6 (updates and requirements)

HMIPv6 (updates and requirements). Objective. Updates in last revision Match against the LMM requirement Way forward. On-link CoA testing. A MAP is a local HA. It was assumed that the security requirements for a local BU are similar to a BU sent to the HA.

ata
Download Presentation

HMIPv6 (updates and requirements)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HMIPv6 (updates and requirements)

  2. Objective Updates in last revision Match against the LMM requirement Way forward

  3. On-link CoA testing • A MAP is a local HA. It was assumed that the security requirements for a local BU are similar to a BU sent to the HA. • No clear reason for treating a MAP differently from a HA, however, an LCoA test was added “just in case the MAP turns out to have stronger security requirements”. • This method was recommended in Atlanta • Uses existing IPsec SA between the MAP and the MN • Protects against bombing another MN on another link. • Tradeoff: Performance Vs stronger security • The LCoA test must be implemented and is optional to use.

  4. LCoA test (OCOT) BU BA (includes OCOT option) BA (includes OCOT option) MN MAP • All messages authenticated with IPsec (AH/ESP) • OCOT option includes a sequence no sent from the MAP to the MN • MN’s reply to MAP includes OCOT (sequence no + 1) • If OCOT is used, MAP marks BCE as “tentative” till it receives MN’s reply • MAP may also forward packets to the MN until it receives the MN’s reply.

  5. Main LMM requirements and HMIPv6 • LMM requirements goals: • Reduce signalling as a result of movement • Reduce processing of signals in the CN • Avoid changes to CN and HA • Secure signalling between MN and LMM agent(s) • Allow progressive LMM deployment capability • Scalable deployment (I.e. linear increase in complexity with increase in number of MNs) • LMM MUST NOT introduce new “security holes” • LMM MUST NOT interfere with MN  CN or MN  HA security • LMM MUST ensure topological confidentiality • Interoperability with non-LMM-aware nodes • LMM MUST NOT increase latency or service disruption due to handovers

  6. Main LMM requirements and HMIPv6 • It is desirable that LMM does not increase manual configuration in routers within the network • LMM MUST interwork with QoS schemes to allow QoS on both the uplink and downlink • (Both of the requirements above are unclear) • All of the above requirements are satisfied by HMIPv6 • One requirement NOT satisfied by HMIPv6: • LMM MUST avoid introducing a single point of failure in the network. • Like the HA, the MAP is a single point of failure, therefore this is not specific to HMIPv6, question to the WG: • Already in MIPv6 or charter???

More Related