1 / 12

Implementation of Flow Management in MIPv6 Environment

Implementation of Flow Management in MIPv6 Environment. draft-soliman-monami6-flow-binding-03.txt. Umar Toseef umr@comnets.uni-bremen.de University of Bremen in collaboration with Siemens AG, Berlin 68 th IETF, Prague. Implementation Overview. Basis for implementation

bethan
Download Presentation

Implementation of Flow Management in MIPv6 Environment

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. Implementation of Flow Management in MIPv6 Environment draft-soliman-monami6-flow-binding-03.txt Umar Toseef umr@comnets.uni-bremen.de University of Bremen in collaboration with Siemens AG, Berlin 68th IETF, Prague

  2. Implementation Overview • Basis for implementation • Linux Kernel 2.6.16 • NEMO MCoA (nemo-0.2-mcoa-beta3-20070118) • Ip6tables packet marking functionality • How far the implementation goes • Filter exchange is possible only between HA and MN • Priorities are not considered • Actions FORWARD and DROP are working but not N-CAST • Filters can be defined using source address/port range, destination address/port range, and protocol • Source/destination prefix, SPI and flow label filters have not been implemented

  3. Processing Field • Draft says to use value 255 as the “Remove Filter” • But there were only 4 bits in the PRO field • Used 15 for “Remove Filter” (It has been corrected in the newer version, 04 draft)

  4. Specifying Src/Dest Ports without Protocol • In the tools (e.g. iptables) that we use we specify the protocol before specifying the port numbers • (E.g. 1) If a user specifies ICMP and port 25 • -> disregard OR generate error • (E.g. 2) gives the port without any protocol • -> always assume UDP and TCP and set filters for both OR generate error

  5. Priorities • User can set overlapping priorities, simple e.g. • E.g. 1 user says port range 5000 to 5200 priority 5 • E.g. 2 user again says port 5100 priority 5 • How should MN, HA and CN handle?

  6. Duplicate Receipt of Filter Rules • If the first Filter ACK is lost, MN will send it the second time • HA will send FID already in list and send Error 135 • How should MN handle this situation?

  7. Performance Results Graph 1) Improvement of application performance • Uses 2 UDP streams (simulates RTP/H323 multi-media) • With one interface many packet drop, with 2 interfaces performance improves

  8. Performance Results • Graph 2) Drop of unwanted flows • Uses 2 TCP flows • 1 flow is dropped hence the other flow bandwidth improves

  9. EndThank You.

  10. PRO Field Back

  11. Srce/Dest Port Fields Back

  12. Priority Fields Back

More Related