1 / 32

Network Mobility

Network Mobility. Yanos Saravanos Avanthi Koneru. Agenda . Introduction Problem Definition Benchmarks and Metrics Components of a mobile architecture Summary of MOBIKE and PANA Conclusion References. Yanos. Avanthi. Why Mobility Matters. Cell phones / PDAs

gittel
Download Presentation

Network Mobility

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. Network Mobility Yanos Saravanos Avanthi Koneru

  2. Agenda • Introduction • Problem Definition • Benchmarks and Metrics • Components of a mobile architecture • Summary of MOBIKE and PANA • Conclusion • References Yanos Avanthi

  3. Why Mobility Matters • Cell phones / PDAs • 692 million cell phones shipped in 2004 • 1.7 billion subscribers by end of 2005 • Streaming multimedia • Live TV

  4. Real Mobility – Cellular Handoff • Hard handoff • Connected to 1 base station at all times • Soft handoff • Connected to 2 base stations temporarily http://www.iec.org/online/tutorials/cell_comm/topic03.html

  5. Handoff Hysteresis • Only handoff when signal drops below a given threshold • Signal could be lower than optimal • Fewer handoffs http://people.deas.harvard.edu/~jones/cscie129/nu_lectures/lecture7/cellular/handoff/handoff.html

  6. Upcoming Cellular Networks • 4G cellular networks being developed • Uses ALL-IP network architecture • Ability to use 802.11 base stations • Highly scalable • Critical in emergency conditions

  7. 4G Network http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~arul/4G.html

  8. Current Security Techniques • HTTP-based schemes • Mobilestar • Point-Point Protocol (PPP) using EAP • 802.1X

  9. Issues with Current Authentication • HTTP-based schemes • Requires user intervention • PPP • Requires point-to-point link • EAP requires extra encapsulation • 802.1X • Only works for 802 protocols • Not widely deployment yet

  10. Problem Definition • All current security protocols do not allow end user to move • New protocols must: • Keep session during handoffs • Allow integration between mobile networks (802.11, cellular, etc) • Not dramatically increase packet size

  11. Benchmarks • Computational intensity • Effect on throughput • Amount of overhead added to the packets • QoS • Packet Loss, Delay • Jitter

  12. Goals for Mobility Support in IPv4 and IPv6. • Construction of fully fledged mobility protocol, which allows nodes to remain reachable while moving around in the Internet. • Enhancements that allow transparent routing of IP datagrams to mobile nodes in the Internet.

  13. Elements of a mobile network architecture “Computer Networking: A top-down approach featuring the Internet”,Kurose and Ross, 3rd edition, Addison Wesley, 2004.

  14. Elements of a mobile network architecture • home network • home agent • foreign agent • foreign address • care-of address • foreign (or visited) network • correspondent • permanent address

  15. Indirect forwarding to a mobile node “Computer Networking: A top-down approach featuring the Internet”,Kurose and Ross, 3rd edition, Addison Wesley, 2004.

  16. Encapsulation and Decapsulation “Computer Networking: A top-down approach featuring the Internet”,Kurose and Ross, 3rd edition, Addison Wesley, 2004.

  17. Direct routing to a mobile user “Computer Networking: A top-down approach featuring the Internet”,Kurose and Ross, 3rd edition, Addison Wesley, 2004.

  18. Security for Mobility on IP • IP mobility introduces the need for extra security because the point of attachment is not fixed, so the link between the mobile node and its home network should be considered insecure. • In all potential mobile-IP scenarios, security will be a critical service enabler, ensuring that the mobile operator can communicate over IP without putting at risk the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the home network and the information it contains.

  19. Mechanisms to be reviewed • Mobility and Multihoming extension for IKEv2 (MOBIKE) • Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA)

  20. MOBIKE - Background • IPSec SA • IKEv2 • Mobike • 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 simultaneously, such as where WLAN and GPRS are used simultaneously.

  21. Establishing a Secure Negotiation Channel using IKEv2 Figure from Dr. Andreas Steffen, Secure Network Communication, Part IV, IP Security (IPsec).

  22. Goals of the MOBIKE working group • IKEv2 mobile IP support for IKE SAs. Support for changing and authenticating the IKE SA endpoints IP addresses as requested by the host. • 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. • 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.

  23. Goals of the MOBIKE working group (..cntd) • 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. • Reduction of header overhead involved with mobility-related tunnels. This is a performance requirement in wireless environments. • Specification of PFKEY extensions to support the IPsec SA movements and tunnel overhead reduction.

  24. PANA-Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access • a layer two agnostic network layer messaging protocol for authenticating IP hosts for network access • a transport protocol for authentication payload (e.g., EAP) between a client (IP based) and a server (agent) in the access network. • Client-server protocol

  25. Why PANA? A scenario: • An IP-based device is required to authenticateitself to the network prior to being authorized to use it. This authentication usually requires a protocol that can support various authentication methods, dynamic service provider selection, and roaming clients. In the absence of such an authentication protocol on most of the link-layers, architectures have resorted to filling the gap by using a number of inadequate methods. Ex: PPPoE • PANA – a cleaner solution to the authentication problem.

  26. Goals of PANA • To define a protocol that allows clients toauthenticate themselves to the access network using IP protocols. • To provide support for various authentication methods, dynamic service provider selection,and roaming clients.

  27. Terminology • PANA Client (PaC) • PANA Client Identifier (PaCI) • Device Identifier (DI) • PANA Authentication Agent (PAA) • Enforcement Point (EP)

  28. Protocol Overview • Discovery and handshake phase • Authentication and authorization phase • Access phase • Re-authentication phase • Termination phase

  29. Conclusion • Utilizing the benefits of the opportunities provided by default in IPv6 for the design of Mobile IP support in IPv6. • Besides, these two protocols there are a lot of other security issues. • Focus on mechanisms which will be adopted in the design of IPv6.

  30. References • “Security requirements for the introduction of mobility to IP”, Security for mobility in IP, EURESCOM, October 1999. URL: http://www.eurescom.de/~pub-deliverables/P900-series/P912/D1/p912d1.pdf • “Security guidelines for the introduction of mobility to IP”, Security for mobility in IP, EURESCOM, March 2000. URL: http://www.eurescom.de/~pub-deliverables/P900-series/P912/D2/p912d2.pdf • Olivier Charles, “Security for Mobility on IP”, MTM 2000, Dublin, February 2000. URL: http://www.eurescom.de/~public-seminars/2000/MTM/12Charles/12aCharles/12Charles.pdf • SEQUI VPN Glossary, URL: http://www.sequi.com/SEQUI_VPN_Glossary.htm#IKE • “Computer Networking: A top-down approach featuring the Internet”,Kurose and Ross, 3rd edition, Addison Wesley, 2004.

  31. References • Mobility for IPv4 (mip4), IETF Working Groups. URL:http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html • Mobility for IPv6 (mip6), IETF Working Groups. URL:http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip6-charter.html • D.Johnson, C. Perkins and J.Arkko, “Mobility Support in IPv6”, RFC 3775. URL:http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3775.txt • Arkko et al, “Using IPsec to Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes and Home Agents”, RFC 3776. URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3776.txt • IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming (mobike), IETF Working Groups. URL:http://www1.ietf.org/proceedings_new/04nov/mobike.html

  32. References • Jari Arkko, “Introduction to multihoming, address selection, failure detection, and recovery”, IETF Proceedings. URL:http://www1.ietf.org/proceedings_new/04nov/slides/mobike-1/sld1.htm • “Design of the MOBIKE protocol”, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mobike-design-00.txt , June 2004. URL:http://www1.ietf.org/proceedings_new/04nov/IDs/draft-ietf-mobike-design-00.txt • Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2-17.txt, September 2004. URL:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2-17.txt • IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming Protocol (MOBIKE), Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-02.txt, September 2005. URL:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-02.txt

More Related