1 / 8

FMIPv6 on Point-to-Point Link

FMIPv6 on Point-to-Point Link. Frank Xia Behcet Sarikaya March 2007. Problem Statement -1. Shared Link All MSs attached to an AR share one or more prefixes for constructing their global IPv6 addresses Point-to-Point Link Each link between an MS and the AR is allocated a

edana
Download Presentation

FMIPv6 on Point-to-Point Link

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. FMIPv6 on Point-to-Point Link Frank Xia Behcet Sarikaya March 2007

  2. Problem Statement -1 • Shared Link • All MSs attached to an AR share one or more prefixes • for constructing their global IPv6 addresses • Point-to-Point Link • Each link between an MS and the AR is allocated a • separate, unique prefix or a set of unique prefixes by • the AR

  3. Previous AR New AR The prefix of the physical link is used by MN for NCoA Previous AP New AP MN Problem Statement - 2 • FMIPv6 is based on shared link model • MN formulates prospective NCoA using prefixes on the physical interface to which the new access point is attached

  4. Problem Statement - 3 • Physical prefix can’t be used by MN for formulating NCoA in a Point-to-Point link • It is very difficult to formulate NCoA in Point-to-Point link -Prefixes for MN’s NCoA are allocated dynamically -PAR can’t get prefixes from NAR for MN’s formulation of NCoA easily

  5. Proposed Solution -1 • Aggregate Prefix In Point-to-Point Link Model, AR should broadcast the prefixes (MNs route information) dynamically upstream, and this causes high routing protocol traffic ( OSPF, etc.). To solve the problem, route aggregation should be used. For example, each AR can be assigned a /48 prefix, while an MN's /64 prefix is derived from the /48 prefix extension. The main, higher-level prefix is called the Aggregate Prefix. An AR only broadcasts the aggregate prefix • Dedicated Prefix The prefix derived from the aggregate prefix and allocated for an MN • Provisional NCoA NCoA obtained from the aggregate prefix • Modified NCoA NCoA obtained from the dedicated prefix

  6. Proposed Solution - 2 • In FMIPv6 Predictive Mode Scenario • Step 1:PAR advertises Aggregate Prefix to MN in PrRtAdv • Step 2:MN formulates a provisional NCoA using Aggregate Prefix • Step 3:MN sends FBU to PAR with Provisional NCoA • Step 4:PAR sends HI to NAR with Provisonal NCoA • Step 5:NAR allocates dedicated prefix to MN generates a new NCoA, and replies with HAck containing the new (modified) NCoA • Step 6:The modified NCoA is delivered to MN through PAR, and MN MUST use the modified NCoA

  7. Next Steps What does WG think about the problem?

  8. ThankYou. Questions?

More Related