Network Mobility Support in IPv6

1. Network Mobility Supportin IPv6 Thierry Ernst - Motorola Labs & INRIA (Planete)

2. Subject 1 • Subject 1: what is Network Mobility Support • Subject 2: Network Mobility Support with Mobile IPv6 • Subject 3: We solicit agreement of the working group for a number of motions

3. Network Mobility Support: Introduction • Have you read “Network Mobility Support in IPv6: Problem Statement and Requirements” (draft-ernst-mobileip-monetv6-00.txt) ? • posted July 2001 • protocol-independent understanding (e.g. NOT based on Mobile IPv6) • terminology • problems • requirements

4. CN AR HA home link AR foreign link LFN LFN MR MR Router Router VMN MN HA MN’s home link LFN LFN LFN LFN Network Mobility Support: Terminology • MNNs = different kind of nodes in the mobile network: • Mobile Router (MR) = Border router of the mobile network • LFNs = Local Fixed Nodes permanently located in mobile network • LMNs= Local Mobile Nodes that belong to the mobile network • VMNs= Visiting Mobile Nodes that do not belong to the mobile network • CNs = all nodes communicating with MR, LFNs and LMNs, VMNs

5. Network Mobility Support • Objectives of Network Mobility Support: • permanent connectivity for ALL MNNs • optimal routing between CNs and ALL MNNs • Problems and Requirements in draft describe the scenarios and issues • Network Mobility Support deserves its own solutions

6. Subject 2 • Subject 1: what is Network Mobility Support • Subject 2: Network Mobility Support with Mobile IPv6 • Subject 3: We solicit agreement of the working group for a number of motions

7. Potential Solutions • Network Renumbering • how do you perform optimal routing ? • Routing • does not scale to wide-area network • Mobile IPv6-based: • MIPv6 may be a good candidate solution • needs extensions • needs to be evaluated first

8. Mobile IPv6-based solution: issues • There is no explicit support of mobile networks in the Mobile IPv6 specification. Issues: • redirection by the HA of packets intended to MNNs is not clear • optimal routing between CNs and MNNs • nested mobility: • VMNs, • LMNs, • Mobile IP-subnet in the mobile network itself • scalability to a large number of mobile networks • how should the MR run a routing protocol ? • What should we do with router advertisements sent on the home link ? • What if several routers in the mobile network ? • How it interacts with the routing protocol running in the home / visited network ? • Some issues highlighted in draft ernst-mobileip-v6-02.txt • draft focus on LFNs.=> not all isssues are covered

9. Mobile IPv6-based solution: Current Proposals • Before draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-14: • support of mobile networks not considered • this has been demonstrated in draft-ernst-mobileip-v6-network-00.txt at 48th IETF Pittsburgh August 01. • draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-14 posted last July: • adds a new sub-option that tells the prefix length to HA and CNs • we think that this section: • tries to solve a problem which is not yet well-understood in the Mobile IP community • does not solve the whole issue • adds more issues (particularly security) • at the risk of further delaying MIPv6 as Proposed Standard

10. Mobile IPv6-based solution: Current Proposals • Prefix Scope Binding Update (MOTOROLA / INRIA) • draft-ernst-mobileip-v6-network-02.txt • more appropriate to support LFNs • HMIPv6 Extended Mode (ERICSSON / INRIA ) • draft-ietf-mobileip-hmipv6-04.txt • more appropriate to support VMNs

11. Mobile IPv6-based solution: appropriate? • All issues not covered • All solutions may not scale to a large number of CNs or a large mobile network • Shall we base solution on Mobile IPv6 ? • Mobile IPv6’s suitability must be studied first. • List all issues pertaining to MIPv6 • Define the scope of the problem with respect to MIPv6 • Do we want to support all kind of networks with MIPv6 ? • Is that even feasible ???

12. Subject 3 • Subject 1: what is Network Mobility Support • Subject 2: Network Mobility Support with Mobile IPv6 • Subject 3: We solicit agreement of the working group for a number of motions

13. 1st Motion • Mobile IP WG is the right place to discuss Network Mobility Support • Add Network Mobility Support in the Mobile IP WG Charter • 2 main objectives: • provide continuous Internet access to ALL MNNs • offer optimal routing between CNs and ALL MNNs

14. 2nd Motion • The Mobile IP Working Group needs: • to agree on a terminology • to define the scope of the problem • to define the requirements • Add Deliverables in Mobile IP WG: • A draft that defines: • terminology • requirements • based on draft-ernst-mobileip-monetv6-00.txt • A draft that • lists Mobile IPv6 issues • defines the scope of the problem with respect to MIPv6 • Could be a single draft depending on if solutions should (could ?) be based on Mobile IPv6 or not

15. 3rd Motion • Network Mobility Support SHALL NOT further delay Mobile IPv6 as Proposed Standard • Potential extensions shall be included in a separate document • new features must not be included in MIPv6 • the sub-option included in draft-v14 shall be removed • We should only make sure that what is already in the Mobile IPv6 specification does not prevent network mobility support

16. 4th Motion • Adopt “Prefix Scope Binding Updates” (draft-ernst-mobileip-v6-network-02.txt) as a working group draft • basic support of MNNs • only left issue = authorization to register a careof address for a prefix

17. Thank you • Fore more information: • http://www.inrialpes.fr/planete/ • Draft, presentation made at the IETF and other documents • Network Mobility Support in IPv6: Problem Statement and Requirements • draft-ernst-mobileip-monetv6-00.txt • Prefix Scope Binding Updates: • draft-ernst-mobileip-v6-network-02.txt • HMIPv6 Extended Mode • draft-ietf-mobileip-hmipv6-04.txt • Seamoby Working Group - micro-mobility design team • draft-ietf-seamoby-mm-problem-01.txt