One document matched: draft-bernardos-manet-autoconf-survey-00.txt
autoconf C. Bernardos
Internet-Draft M. Calderon
Expires: January 12, 2006 UC3M
July 11, 2005
Survey of IP address autoconfiguration mechanisms for MANETs
draft-bernardos-manet-autoconf-survey-00
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 12, 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
This Internet Draft aims at describing some of the already proposed
mechanisms for the autoconfiguration of IP addresses in MANET
networks, trying to provide a useful reference in the standardisation
process. Solutions proposed in research papers and submitted as I-Ds
are presented and classified by a simple criteria. The analysis of
the solutions includes a brief description of the mechanism and also
a summary of the key characteristics.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
Table of Contents
1. Introduction and problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. IP address auto-configuration protocols . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Conflict-detection allocation mechanisms . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1 IP address Autoconfiguration for Ad Hoc Networks
(Perkins et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.2 IPv6 Autoconfiguration in Large Scale Mobile
Ad-Hoc Networks (Weniger et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.3 Weak Duplicate Address Detection in Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks (Vaidya) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1.4 Global connectivity for IPv6 Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks (Wakikawa et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.1.5 Ad Hoc IP Address Autoconfiguration (Jeong et al.) . . 10
2.1.6 Automatic configuration of IPv6 addresses for
nodes in a MANET with multiple gateways (Ruffino
et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1.7 Address autoconfiguration in Optimized Link State
Routing Protocol (Adjih et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.8 MANETconf: Configuration of Hosts in a Mobile Ad
Hoc Network (Nesargi et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.9 Extended Support for Global Connectivity for IPv6
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (Cha et al.) . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 Conflict-free allocation mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2.1 Prophet Address Allocation for Large Scale MANETs
(Zhou et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2.2 Self-Configuring Networks. DRCP and DAAP (McAuley
et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2.2.1 DRCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.2.2 DAAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.3 Autoconfiguration, Registration, and Mobility
Management for Pervasive Computing. DDCP (Misra et
al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2.4 IP Address Assignment in a Mobile Ad Hoc Network
(Mohsin et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2.5 An address assignment for the automatic
configuration of mobile ad hoc networks (Tayal et
al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.6 Simple MANET Address Autoconfiguration (Clausen et
al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.7 Gateway and address autoconfiguration for IPv6
adhoc networks (Jelger et al.) . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 25
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
1. Introduction and problem statement
A group of mobile wireless nodes capable of spontaneously forming a
network and support multi-hop communications constitutes a Mobile Ad
Hoc Network (MANET). This kind of multi-hop network presents some
interesting advantages, such as not requiring any infrastructure to
work, e.g., allowing the extension of coverage areas or providing
connectivity to nodes that not have the suitable access technologies.
Several manet routing protocol specifications have been developed by
the IETF MANET WG. In order to enable these networks to support IP
services, address configuration of the nodes is a requirement.
However, currently there is no standard specification that can be
used by manet nodes to autoconfigure their IP addresses.
Existing solutions for IP infrastructure-based networks (e.g., RFCs
2461, 2462, 3315 etc.) cannot be directly used by nodes constituting
an ad hoc network. These protocols assume the availability of a
multicast capable link for signalling, but there is not such a link
in ad-hoc multi-hop networks.
The main goal of the AUTOCONF group is to develop solutions for IPv4
and IPv6 address auto-configuration (both manet-local and global
scoped). The group has identified three possible scenarios of MANET
where IP address auto-configuration is required:
o Stand-alone ad hoc network: ad hoc networks not connected to any
external network, such as conference networks, battlefield
networks, surveillance networks, etc. In this scenario, nodes may
be added or removed randomly. Besides, most likely no pre-
established nor reliable address or prefix allocation agency will
be present in the network.
o Ad hoc network at the edge of an infra-structure network: Stand-
alone network connected to the Internet via one or more Internet
gateways (i.e., nodes that have connectivity to both an
infrastructure access network and the ad hoc network, providing
connectivity to the nodes attached to the latter). These Internet
gateways may be used in the auto-configuration address mechanisms,
e.g., by providing prefix information to the MANET nodes.
o Hybrid networks: ad hoc network that may be stand-alone for most
of the time but temporarily connected to the infrastructure
network (e.g., a car network connected while parked and
disconnected otherwise).
Ad hoc networks present a particular characteristic that should be
taken into account when designing address auto-configuration
protocols: two or more ad hoc network may get merged (the problem of
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
having two or more nodes with the same IP address may arise) or
single ad hoc network may get partitioned into two or more separate
networks, at any moment of time.
This Internet Draft aims at describing some of the already proposed
mechanisms for the autoconfiguration of IP addresses in MANET
networks, trying to provide a useful reference in the standardisation
process. Solutions proposed in research papers and submitted as I-Ds
are presented and classified by a simple criteria. The analysis of
the solutions includes a brief description of the mechanism and also
a summary of the key characteristics.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
2. IP address auto-configuration protocols
In this section we briefly describe some of the existing proposals
for IP address autoconfiguration, classifying them into two different
categories: conflict-detection and conflict-free allocation. Some of
the mechanisms included in this document are not complete
autoconfiguration protocols, but just pieces (e.g., Duplicate Address
Detection in the MANET) required in a more general autoconfiguration
protocol. We also include them for completeness.
2.1 Conflict-detection allocation mechanisms
-----------------------------
| |
| Pool of |
| addresses |
| |
| |
| addrX |
| A |
-----+----------------------- -----
| | |
(1) | Node x picks an ----->| z |
| address (addrX) / | |
V / -----
----- ----- / (2) is addrX OK?
| | (2) | |/
Node x | x |----------------->| y |\
(3) waits | | is addrX OK? | | \ (2) is addrX OK?
for an ----- ----- \ -----
answer \ A \ | |
\ | ----->| t |
(2) is addrX OK? \ _/ | |
| __/ -----
V __/
----- __/
| | __/ (2) is addrX OK?
| w |_/
| |
-----
Figure 1: Conflict-detection allocation scheme
These methods are based on picking an IP address from a pool of
available addresses, configuring it as tentative address and asking
the rest of the nodes of the network, checking the address uniqueness
and requesting for approval from all the nodes of the network. In
case of conflict (e.g., the address has been already configured by
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
another node), the node should pick a new address and repeat the
procedure (sort-of "trial and error" method). An example of
conflict-detection allocation general mechanism is shown in Figure 1.
2.1.1 IP address Autoconfiguration for Ad Hoc Networks (Perkins et al.)
This ad hoc address autoconfiguration mechanism, proposed in [1] and
[14], basically consists in choosing an address randomly belonging to
a network prefix available to the MANET and performing a Duplicate
Address Detection procedure within the MANET (that we can called
MANET-DAD to avoid confusing it with the DAD performed in IPv6
single-hop networks). The mechanism is defined both for IPv4 ([14],
[1]) and IPv6 ([1]).
This mechanism works (for IPv4) as follows: when a node requires a
unique IP address, it first selects a random host ID from the range
[2048, (2^(32-n)-1)], where n is the number of significant bits in
the network prefix available for the MANET. The node then appends
that host ID to the prefix, thus forming the tentative IP address for
which it performs MANET-DAD. The node also selects a random host ID
in the range [0, 2047] and appends this value to the available
network prefix, forming an address that is used as a temporary source
IP address for the short period while the node performs MANET-DAD.
The MANET-DAD is performed by creating an Address Request (AREQ)
message, including its tentative IP address, which is broadcasted to
its neighbours (using the randomly selected source address). When a
node receives an AREQ message, it creates a reverse route entry for
the node indicated by the random originator IP address. If the
tentative address contained in the AREQ message does not match the
address of the receiving node, it rebroadcasts the message to its
neighbours. If the IP address of the receiving node matches the
tentative address contained in the AREQ message it sends an Address
Reply (AREP) message to the sender, indicating that the address is
already in use. The route created by the AREQ messages is used to
route the message back to the source node.
A requesting node sends an AREQ message, waits for the reception of
an AREP message during a timer and retries the process several times.
If no AREP is received, it assumes that the tentative address
included in the AREQ messages is not in use and takes it for its own.
If an AREP message is received, then it picks up a different host ID
and begins the MANET-DAD process again.
For IPv6, the mechanism is similar. The tentative address belongs to
a non-link-local prefix (a prefix obtained by other means or a
default MANET_PREFIX reserved for MANET autoconfiguration). The
source address belongs to a different non-overlapping prefix (or part
of the prefix, if the same prefix is used for both tentative and
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
source addresses). The protocol is basically the same, but using
different message formats. For IPv4, ICMP messages are used, whereas
in IPv6 modified Neighbour Solicitation and Advertisement messages
are used.
In [15] some limitations of this solution are presented.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Suitable for IPv4 and IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution, but it
is best suited for reactive routing protocols such as AODV.
o It does not support partition/merging.
2.1.2 IPv6 Autoconfiguration in Large Scale Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks
(Weniger et al.)
The solution described in [16] extends the Neighbour Discovery and
IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration mechanisms to work in multi-
hop wireless networks. To do so, some modifications are needed:
o The Neighbour Solicitation message is modified to allow it to be
broadcasted to a bounded area of radius r_s hops (instead of only
a single hop). In addition, a new option for Neighbour Discovery
is defined (called MANET option) which contains a Random Source ID
(RS-ID) field, that is used to distinguish different nodes. Nodes
use the all-nodes multicast address instead of the solicited-node
multicast address. This mechanism guarantees link-local addresses
to be unique within the scope (limited by r_s) of each node.
o To enable the configuration of unique site-local (note: this is
not described in the paper, but this method could be also used to
configure global addresses) addresses, a hierarchy is established
by special nodes (called leader nodes) that configure a group of
nodes by issuing Router Advertisements (RA) within their scope,
containing the subnet ID (i.e., network prefix) and its link-local
address as source address. The subnet ID has to be unique for
each leader node, so MANET-DAD has to be performed between the
leader nodes within the entire Ad hoc network. An algorithm is
provided for the election of leader nodes.
It should be noted that because of the nature of the solution, it
would be possible to have multihomed nodes (if a node is within the
scope of more than one leader node).
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution, but it
may be advantageous if it follows an hierarchical structure.
Besides, it is also preferable that nodes move in logical groups.
o It supports partition/merging.
2.1.3 Weak Duplicate Address Detection in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
(Vaidya)
The mechanism described in [17] is not by itself an IP address
autoconfiguration protocol, but a mechanism to ensure that packets
``meant for'' one node are not routed to another node, even if the
two nodes have chosen the same address.
The authors follow an approach to solve the IP address
autoconfiguration problem in ad Hoc networks, that is pretty common.
The node just picks a tentative address randomly and performs a
MANET-DAD procedure to detect if that address is already in use.
Typically, these MANET-DAD mechanisms make use of timeouts and the
author of [17] says that message delays cannot be bounded in an ad
hoc network (or if possible, determining the delays is non-trivial).
Therefore, he proposes a 'weak' DAD, that prevents a packet to be
delivered to a ``wrong'' destination node (even if two nodes have the
same IP address). To do that, it is assumed that each node is pre-
assigned a unique ``key'' (MAC addresses can be used as keys if they
are guaranteed to be unique). Information about {IP address, key}
pairs is included in the routing protocols (they assume that it is
not possible to embed the key in the IP address), so address
duplication can be detected. The authors describe how to do that
with Link State Routing (proactive routing protocol) and Dynamic
Source Routing (reactive routing protocol). The weak DAD cannot be
used when flooding is used as the routing protocol.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv4. It would be also possible to use this mechanism
in IPv6.
o Restricted to particular ad hoc routing solutions. It is
described how the mechanism works with LSR and DSR.
o It supports partition/merging.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
2.1.4 Global connectivity for IPv6 Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (Wakikawa et
al.)
This mechanism [2] is similar to [3] from the point of view of how
IPv6 addresses are configured. Global prefix information is obtained
from Internet gateways. They propose two methods for the Internet
gateway discovery: one method periodically disseminates gateway
advertisements to all nodes in the MANET; the other method utilises
solicitation and advertisement signalling between a MANET node and
the gateway. Extended router solicitation and advertisements of the
Neighbour Discovery Protocol (NDP) or extended control message of
each MANET routing protocol can be used for this signalling. The
proposed methods target all MANET protocols regardless of whether
they are reactive and proactive. Internet gateways supply their own
global prefix information and IPv6 global address to MANET nodes
somehow, either proactively or reactively. In this way, the reactive
and proactive route discovery features of each MANET routing protocol
are not disturbed.
Once the MANET node has obtained the prefix information from the
Internet gateway, it uses the 64-bit interface ID in order to
construct a valid address with the acquired prefix. It is assumed
than before configuring a global IPv6 address, the node has
configured a link local address, and MANET-DAD has been performed for
that link-local address (using the mechanism defined in [1] and
[14]), so it is assumed that the global address would be also unique.
If not, the node may perform another MANET-DAD for this global
address.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution.
2.1.5 Ad Hoc IP Address Autoconfiguration (Jeong et al.)
The IP address autoconfiguration mechanism described in [4] is
comprised of three steps:
1. Selection of a random address.
2. Verification of the address uniqueness.
3. Assignment of the address to the network interface.
The MANET-DAD procedure follows an hybrid approach, consisting of two
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
phases:
o Strong DAD: based on [1]. Strong DAD is done in the
initialisation in order to check if there is an address
duplication or not. [4] describes the message format for IPv4 and
IPv6, using ICMP messages (new types are defined). [5] describes
the message format for AODV.
o Weak DAD: based on [17]. During ad hoc routing, weak DAD is used
to find out whether address duplication, due to merging, has
occurred or not. The concept of ``Virtual IP address'', which is
the combination of ''IP address'' and ``Key'', is used.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Suitable for IPv4 and IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution.
o It supports partition/merging.
2.1.6 Automatic configuration of IPv6 addresses for nodes in a MANET
with multiple gateways (Ruffino et al.)
This mechanism [6] describes a mechanism to enable nodes of a MANET
connected to the infrastructure - by means of one or more gateways -
to configure IP addresses.
Each of the gateways available at the MANET has a global IPv6 prefix
that is announced using a new OSLR message type, called Prefix
Advertisement (PA). The nodes of the MANET can configure addresses
belonging to each of the prefixes received (a generic MANET DAD
procedure, such as [1], has to performed in order to verify
uniqueness of MANET-local and global addresses).
The mechanism basically works as follows: at boostrap, a node
configures a Primary Address (PADD) that is MANET-scoped and is used
as main address in OLSR messages. The node then is able to start
participating to OLSR and receiving topology information. With the
prefix information received in the PA messages, the node is able to
build a set of global IPv6 addresses (called Secondary Addresses:
SADDs). Among them, the node chooses the "best" prefix and starts
using the address formed from this prefix (called, Designated
Secondary Address: DSADD). The node introduces all (or a subset) of
the SADDs (including the DSADD) in OLSR messages and starts
broadcasting them, enabling these addresses to be routable and
reachable within the MANET.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended for IPv6.
o Restricted to OLSR.
o It supports partition/merging.
2.1.7 Address autoconfiguration in Optimized Link State Routing
Protocol (Adjih et al.)
This draft [7] describes a mechanism to perform MANET-DAD by
extending the OLSR routing protocol. Basically, the MANET-DAD
algorithm uses an special control packet called ``Multiple Address
Declaration'' (MAD), that includes the node address and a node
identifier (that must be globally unique). This packet is broadcast
in the network, so all the nodes receive this packet. If a node
receives a MAD message containing an address that matches its own
address and a node identifier that does not, this implies that the
address is duplicated. To spare the channel bandwidth, it is
proposed to send MAD packets using the MPR (Multi-Point Relay)
flooding.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv6.
o The mechanism is specified as an extension to OLSR.
2.1.8 MANETconf: Configuration of Hosts in a Mobile Ad Hoc Network
(Nesargi et al.)
Nesargi et al. propose in [15] a Distributed Dynamic Host
Configuration Protocol (DDHCP) designed to configure nodes in a
MANET.
It basically operates as follows: a node proposes a candidate IP
address for assignment to a newly arriving node. If the proposal is
accepted by all the nodes that are part of the MANET, the proposed
address is assigned to the newly arrived node. Otherwise, another
candidate IP address is chosen and the process is repeated.
When a node (called requester) joins the MANET it broadcasts a
request message to all its neighbours, waiting for a reply from a
node willing to act as the initiator for the assignment of an IP
address to the requester. If it is the first node of the MANET (no
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
replies are received) it configures itself an IP address and the
MANET its initialised. If the requester receives a reply message (or
more than one), it then selects one of the reachable nodes that
answered as the initiator, which will be the one that performs the
address allocation on its behalf. All other nodes know a route to
the initiator and can forward their responses to it. Ultimately, the
initiator conveys the result of the address allocation operations to
the requester.
The proposed protocol has some other interesting features, such as
releasing unused IP addresses, soft state maintenance, concurrent IP
address allocation and partition/merging support.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv4.
o It assumes (for simplicity) that the IP address block from which
nodes are to be assigned their IP address is known in advance.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution.
o Intended for standalone MANETs. Nevertheless, it seems that it
could be used for connected MANETs.
2.1.9 Extended Support for Global Connectivity for IPv6 Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks (Cha et al.)
[8] describes how to provide enhanced Internet connectivity to mobile
ad-hoc networks. The protocol is devised as an extension to AODV,
but the concept may be applicable to other proactive routing
protocols.
The protocol basically consists in nodes requesting global addresses
to a gateway (GW), which assigns a non-used address to the requesting
node. More details can be found in [8].
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv6.
o Although the protocol is devised as an extension to AODV, it could
be applicable to any proactive routing protocol.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
2.2 Conflict-free allocation mechanisms
These methods assume that the addresses that are delegated are not
being used by any node in the network. This can be achieved, for
example, by ensuring that the nodes that participate in the
delegation have disjoint address pools. In this way, there is no
need of performing MANET-DAD. An example of a conflict-free
allocation general mechanism is shown in Figure 2.
------------------------------
| |
| Pool of |
| addresses |
| |
-----+------------------------
|
(1) | Node x (first node) picks the
| pool and configures its interfaces
|
-+--- -----
| | (3) Node y requests | | (2) Node y joins
| x |<--------------------| y | the network
| | some addresses | |
-+--- ---+-
| \ ^ |
| \___________________/ |
| |
| (4) Node x gives half |
| its pool of |
| addresses |
| |
-------+------- ------------+--
| | | |
| Pool of | | Pool of |
| Node x | | Node y |
| | | |
--------------- ---------------
(5) Both Node x and Node y ?
can give addresses to --+--
new arriving nodes that | |
request IP addresses | z |
| |
-----
Figure 2: Conflict-free allocation scheme
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
2.2.1 Prophet Address Allocation for Large Scale MANETs (Zhou et al.)
The mechanism defined in [18] is based on using an stateful function
f(n) (where the initial state of f(n) is the seed) that produces as
output an integer sequence of numbers. Different seeds lead to
different sequences, and the state of f(n) is updated. This function
can be used to derive IP addresses if it satisfies certain
properties:
o The interval between two occurrences of the same number in a
sequence is extremely long.
o The probability of more than one occurrence of the same number in
a limited number of different sequences initiated by different
seeds during some interval is extremely low.
This properties may be satisfied if the space of available addresses
is large, so it is easier to achieve in IPv6 than in IPv4.
The mechanism basically work as follows: the first node chooses a
random number as its IP address and uses a random or default state
value as the seed for its f(n). When a different node approaches,
the first node uses its f(n) to obtain a different number and state.
This number is used by the second node as its IP address, and the
state is used as the seed for its f(n). After that both nodes are
able to assign IP addresses to other nodes.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Suitable for IPv4 and IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution.
o It supports partition/merging.
2.2.2 Self-Configuring Networks. DRCP and DAAP (McAuley et al.)
In [19] the Dynamic Registration and Configuration Protocol (DRCP)
and Dynamic Address Allocation Protocol (DAAP) are described. These
two protocols together may provide autoconfiguration to entire
networks. The authors state that their proposal is concerned with
registration and autoconfiguration in 'quasi-dynamic networks'. They
define quasi-dynamic networks as those that require rapid deployment,
but are relatively stable except for some incremental deployment and
losses.
Their goal is to allow all hosts and routers in the quasi-dynamic
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
domain to be plug and play, being the only restriction on the number
of nodes the size of the address space (paper focused in IPv4, but
solution would be also applicable to IPv6).
2.2.2.1 DRCP
The Dynamic Registration and Configuration Protocol (DRCP) is heavily
based on DHCP, but aims at being faster and more suited to the quasi-
dynamic network scenario (e.g., by using efficiently the scarce
wireless bandwidth).
DRCP adds some new messages to DHCP. It uses a client-server model.
The server sends periodic ADVERTISEMENT messages. The client
transmits DISCOVER (or REQUEST) messages - requesting an IP address -
until it gets an OFFER message - that carries a configuration message
- (or ACK). The server keeps retransmitting the OFFER (or ACK)
message until it gets an ACCEPT or DECLINE message.
2.2.2.2 DAAP
The Dynamic Address Allocation Protocol (DAAP) is a new protocol that
basically distributes address-pools among nodes in a domain. This
allows any node to act as a new DRCP server, using a part of the
addresses of the pool for allocation to new arriving nodes. The
protocol is very simple and defines only two messages: one to request
an address pool (POOL_REQUEST) and one to convey the response
(POOL_RESPONSE).
The combination of DRCP and DAAP allows a rapid configuration of IP
addresses in a network. Basically the first node has configured, by
some other means (e.g., statically), an address pool. It then
configures its interfaces using DRCP. After that, it starts sending
DRCP ADVERTISEMENT messages. When a new node arrives, and discover
the server, it configures an IP address in the interface that
connects to that server, using DRCP. Then, it requests an address
pool using DAAP. The initial node sends to the new node half of its
address pool. The new node configures then the rest of its
interfaces using DRCP and may start acting as a new DRCP server on
the network.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv4, but it could be applicable to IPv6.
o Aimed for quasi-dynamic networks, so it is not a general MANET IP
address autoconfiguration solution.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution, as it is
not even restricted to ad hoc.
2.2.3 Autoconfiguration, Registration, and Mobility Management for
Pervasive Computing. DDCP (Misra et al.)
The Dynamic Configuration Distribution Protocol (DDCP) proposed in
[20] is quite similar to the DAAP proposal [19]. Actually DDCP just
automates the distribution of address pools to other nodes, that can
then run any link configuration protocol (LCP), like DHCP or DRCP to
configure addresses of incoming nodes. The main difference with DAAP
is that DDCP provides also autoconfiguration of additional IP-related
parameters and capabilities, such as the location of DNS and SIP
servers. Another difference is that DDCP explicitly states that
nodes, when requested, split their address pools into two parts,
forwarding the second part to the requester node (in DAAP, there is
not such detail about how the address pool has to be split, although
in the examples, the pool is halved in two as well).
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv4.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution, as it is
not even restricted to ad hoc.
2.2.4 IP Address Assignment in a Mobile Ad Hoc Network (Mohsin et al.)
The solution described in [21] is based on the concept of binary
split, but address also the issue of partitioning, merging and abrupt
departure of nodes from the MANET. This is done by associating a
Partition ID, which should be universally unique, to every partition.
If a MANET gets partitioned into two, as long as they do not run out
of IP addresses, they do not generate new Partition IDs, so if they
merge later there is no duplicated address. If one of the portions
runs out of addresses, it generates a new Partition ID and acquires
the IP address block that belongs to the other portion. If this
portions merge later (the case of two MANETs that had not been
previously part of the same MANET is analogous), one of the portions
has to give up its IP address block. In this mechanism, the one with
the larger address block is the one that gives up it addresses and
has to acquire a new one.
Summary of some other characteristics:
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
o Suitable for IPv4 and IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution.
o It supports partition/merging.
2.2.5 An address assignment for the automatic configuration of mobile
ad hoc networks (Tayal et al.)
The solution described in [22] is very similar to the previous one
([21]), sharing the idea (also used by others) of having nodes
assigning half of their address pools to newly arrived nodes that
request IP addresses.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Suitable for IPv4 and IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad-hoc routing solution.
o It supports partition/merging.
2.2.6 Simple MANET Address Autoconfiguration (Clausen et al.)
This draft [9] defines a simple autoconfiguration mechanism, based on
partitioning a local scoped address space among the nodes of the
MANET. This address space is used for assigning ``temporary
addresses'' (also called ``local''). The nodes periodically signals
their address space in ADDR_BEACON messages, in order to detect and
solve conflicts.
When a new arriving node wants to configure a global IPv6 address, it
first has to acquire a temporary address. To do this, it first
listens to ADDR_BEACON messages sent by those nodes that may act as
'configuring nodes'. The new node selects a node as its configuring
node and sends to it an ADDR_CONFIG message in order to request a
local address. The configuring node, upon the reception of this
request, assigns a local address to the new node and signals this
assignment trough another ADDR_CONFIG message (additionally, this
address is marked as ``used'' in the ADDR_BEACON messages it sends
afterwards). Once the new node has configured a local address it can
start participating in the routing protocol and it can start
acquiring a global IP address. The configuring node is in charge of
acting on behalf of the new node, and different mechanisms may be
used, as acting as a proxy DHCP server and transmitting a request to
an existing DHCP server or consulting the topology table (in case of
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
proactive routing protocols as OLSR) and picking an non-used address.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv6.
o The mechanism is specified as an extension to OLSR, but nothing
prevents the mechanism to work with other routing protocols.
2.2.7 Gateway and address autoconfiguration for IPv6 adhoc networks
(Jelger et al.)
This solution [3], combines the problem of IP address configuration
and gateway discovery (needed to obtain global connectivity).
Basically, each gateway (it could be more than one in the same MANET)
sends periodically GW_INFO messages to its one-hop neighbours. This
information includes its IPv6 global address and prefix length. If a
receiving node decides to use this information, it has to forward
this message (updating some fields) to its neighbours (this leads to
the so-called 'prefix continuity': any node A that selected a given
prefix P has at least one neighbour on its path to the selected
gateway G). The prefix information obtained from these GW_INFO
messages is used in the creation of the global IPv6 address of the
node, by adding the EUI64 of the interface from which the GW_INFO
message has been received (padding with zeros if needed). [3] states
that the MANET-DAD procedure must not be performed.
Summary of some other characteristics:
o Intended to IPv6.
o Not restricted to any particular ad hoc routing solution.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
3. Conclusions
This draft has presented some of the solutions for the problem of the
autoconfiguration of IP addresses in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks that have
been proposed so far. This document tries to provide a reference
that could help in the discussions of the AUTOCONF group, just
presenting the already available mechanisms that tackle the
autoconfiguration problem.
A detailed analysis of the characteristics (i.e., complexity,
communication overhead, latency, scalability, network requirements,
etc.) of each proposal, as well as a more extensive problem
statement, are not included yet.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
4. Security Considerations
This documents does not raise any security issue. The possible
security considerations of the described proposals have not been
addressed in this I-D.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
5. References
5.1 Normative References
[1] Perkins, C., Wakikawa, R., Malinen, J., Belding-Royer, E., and
Y. Suan, "IP Address Autoconfiguration for Ad Hoc Networks",
draft-ietf-manet-autoconf-01.txt (work in progress),
November 2001.
[2] Wakikawa, R., "Global Connectivity for IPv6 Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks", draft-wakikawa-manet-globalv6-03 (work in progress),
October 2003.
[3] Jelger, C., "Gateway and address autoconfiguration for IPv6
adhoc networks", draft-jelger-manet-gateway-autoconf-v6-02
(work in progress), April 2004.
[4] Jeong, J., "Ad Hoc IP Address Autoconfiguration",
draft-jeong-adhoc-ip-addr-autoconf-04 (work in progress),
February 2005.
[5] Jeong, J., "Ad Hoc IP Address Autoconfiguration for AODV",
draft-jeong-manet-aodv-addr-autoconf-01 (work in progress),
July 2004.
[6] Ruffino, S. and P. Stupar, "Automatic configuration of IPv6
addresses for nodes in a MANET with multiple gateways",
draft-ruffino-manet-autoconf-multigw-00 (work in progress),
June 2005.
[7] Laouiti, A., "Address autoconfiguration in Optimized Link State
Routing Protocol", draft-laouiti-manet-olsr-address-autoconf-00
(work in progress), February 2005.
[8] Cha, H., Park, J., and H. Kim, "Extended Support for Global
Connectivity for IPv6 Mobile Ad Hoc Networks",
draft-cha-manet-extended-support-globalv6-00 (work in
progress), October 2003.
[9] Clausen, T. and E. Baccelli, "Simple MANET Address
Autoconfiguration", draft-clausen-manet-address-autoconf-00
(work in progress), February 2005.
[10] Jeong, J., "Requirements for Ad Hoc IP Address
Autoconfiguration", draft-jeong-manet-addr-autoconf-reqts-04
(work in progress), February 2005.
[11] Ruffino, S., Stupar, P., and T. Clausen, "Autoconfiguration in
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
a MANET: connectivity scenarios and technical issues",
draft-ruffino-manet-autoconf-scenarios-00 (work in progress),
October 2004.
[12] Ruffino, S., "Connectivity Scenarios for MANET",
draft-ruffino-conn-scenarios-00 (work in progress),
February 2005.
[13] Wakikawa, R., "IPv6 Support on Mobile Ad-hoc Network",
draft-wakikawa-manet-ipv6-support-00 (work in progress),
February 2005.
5.2 Informative References
[14] Suan, Y., Belding-Royer, E., and C. Perkins, "Internet
Connectivity for Ad hoc Mobile Networks", International Journal
of Wireless Information Networks special issue on 'Mobile Ad
Hoc Networks (MANETs): Standards, Research, Applications' ,
2002.
[15] Nesargi, S. and R. Prakash, "MANETconf: Configuration of Hosts
in a Mobile Ad Hoc Network", IEEE INFOCOM 2002 , 2002.
[16] Weniger, K. and M. Zitterbart, "IPv6 Autoconfiguration in Large
Scale Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks", European Wireless 2002 , 2002.
[17] Vaidya, N., "Weak Duplicate Address Detection in Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks", MOBIHOC'02 , 2002.
[18] Zhou, H., Ni, L., and M. Mutka, "Prophet Address Allocation for
Large Scale MANETs", Proceedings of INFOCOM 2003 , 2003.
[19] McAuley, A. and K. Manousakis, "Self-Configuring Networks",
21st Century Military Communications Conference Proceedings ,
2000.
[20] Misra, A., Das, S., McAuley, A., and S. Das,
"Autoconfiguration, Registration, and Mobility Management for
Pervasive Computing", IEEE Personal Communications , 2001.
[21] Mohsin, M. and R. Prakash, "IP Address Assignment in a Mobile
Ad Hoc Network", MILCOM 2002 , 2002.
[22] Tayal, A. and L. Patnaik, "An address assignment for the
automatic configuration of mobile ad hoc networks", Personal
Ubiquitous Computing , 2004.
[23] Zhou, Z. and A. Seneviratne, "A Survey of Zero and Auto
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
Configurations for Wireless Networks", ATNAC 2003 , 2003.
Authors' Addresses
Carlos J. Bernardos
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Av. Universidad, 30
Leganes, Madrid 28911
Spain
Phone: +34 91624 8859
Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
Maria Calderon
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Av. Universidad, 30
Leganes, Madrid 28911
Spain
Phone: +34 91624 8780
Email: maria@it.uc3m.es
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft MANET autoconf survey July 2005
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Bernardos & Calderon Expires January 12, 2006 [Page 25]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-22 23:01:39 |