One document matched: draft-chan-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-05.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC ''
'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml'>
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc iprnotified="no"?>
<?rfc strict="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="yes" ?>
<rfc category="info" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-chan-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-05">
<front>
<title abbrev="mobility anchor switching">Distributed Mobility Anchoring</title>
<author initials="H" surname="Chan" fullname="H Anthony Chan">
<organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>5340 Legacy Dr. Building 3</street>
<city>Plano, TX 75024</city>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>h.a.chan@ieee.org</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="X" surname="Wei" fullname="Xinpeng Wei">
<organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Xin-Xi Rd. No. 3, Haidian District</street>
<city>Beijing, 100095</city>
<country>P. R. China</country>
</postal>
<email>weixinpeng@huawei.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="J" surname="Lee" fullname="Jong-Hyouk Lee">
<organization>Sangmyung University</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>708 Hannuri Building</street>
<city>Cheonan 330-720</city>
<country>Korea</country>
</postal>
<email>jonghyouk@smu.ac.kr</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="S" surname="Jeon" fullname="Seil Jeon">
<organization>Instituto de Telecomunicacoes</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Campus Universitario de Santiago</street>
<city>Aveiro 3810-193</city>
<country>Portugal</country>
</postal>
<email>seiljeon@av.it.pt</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="F. L." surname="Templin" fullname="Fred L. Templin">
<organization>Boeing Research and Technology</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>P.O. Box 3707</street>
<city>Seattle</city>
<region>WA</region>
<code>98124</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<email>fltemplin@acm.org</email>
</address>
</author>
<date year="2015"></date>
<area></area>
<workgroup>DMM</workgroup>
<abstract>
<t>
This document defines
the mobility management solutions
in the context of a distributed mobility management deployment.
It consider the problem of assigning a mobility anchor
at the initiation of a flow.
In addition, the mid-session switching of the mobility anchor
in a distributed mobility management environment is considered.
</t>
</abstract>
</front>
<middle>
<!-- Introduction -->
<section anchor="intro" title="Introduction">
<t>
A key requirement in distributed mobility management
<xref target="RFC7333" />
is to enable traffic to avoid traversing single mobility anchor
far from the optimal route.
Recall that distributed mobility management solutions
do not make use of centrally deployed mobility anchor <xref target="Paper-Distributed.Mobility" />.
As such, a flow SHOULD be able to have its traffic
changing from traversing one mobility anchor
to traversing another mobility anchor
as the mobile node moves,
or when changing operation and management (OAM) requirements
call for mobility anchor switching,
thus avoiding non-optimal routes.
This draft proposes distributed mobility anchoring solutions.
</t>
<t>
The needs of IP-layer mobility support are diverse
so that the use of distributed anchoring may differ according to the needs.
</t>
<t>
A mobile node (MN) may be running a flow with its correspondent node (CN)
for which the source IP address of this flow belongs to MN's network.
That is, it is anchored to an access router (anchor) belonging to MN's network.
When there are multiple anchors,
the flow may need to select the anchor when it is initiated
(<xref target="sec:af-in-net-attach" />).
Using an anchor in MN's network has the advantage
that the packets can simply be forwarded according to the forwarding table.
The anchor may be in the MN's network when the flow was initiated.
As the MN moves from one network to another,
IP address no longer belongs to the new network.
To order that the IP address of the flow is in the new network
different methods can be used dependent on the needs of the flow.
If the ongoing IP flow can cope with an IP prefix/address change,
the flow can be reiniated with a new IP address
anchored in the new network
(<xref target="sec:changing-anchor" />).
On the other hand,
if the ongoing IP flow cannot cope with such change,
the IP address anchoring can be moved from the original network to the new network
(<xref target="sec:moving-anchor" />).
</t>
<!--
<t>
A mobile node (MN) may also be running a flow with its correspondent node (CN)
for which the source IP address of this flow does not belong to MN's network
(<xref target="sec:af-not-in-net-attach" />).
As the MN moves from one network to another,
an ongoing flow may continue to use the IP prefix/address of the original network
(<xref target="sec:keeping-anchor" />)
by routing the packets using indirection
(<xref target="sec:keeping-anchor-indirection" />).
It the route then becomes non-optimal,
the routes may be optimized
(<xref target="sec:keeping-anchor-indirection-optimization" />).
</t>
-->
</section>
<!-- Conventions and definitions -->
<section title="Conventions and Terminology">
<t>
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL","SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in <xref target="RFC2119" />.
</t>
<t>All general mobility-related terms and their acronyms used in this document are to be interpreted as defined in the Mobile IPv6 base specification
<xref target="RFC6275" />,
the Proxy Mobile IPv6 specification
<xref target="RFC5213" />,
and the DMM current practices and gap analysis
<xref target="RFC7429" />.
This includes terms such as mobile node (MN), correspondent node (CN), home agent (HA), home address (HoA), care-of-address (CoA), local mobility anchor (LMA), and mobile access gateway (MAG).
</t>
<t>In addition, this document uses the following term:</t>
<t>
<list style='hanging'>
<t hangText='Home network of an application session (or of an HoA):'>
the network that has allocated the IP address (HoA)
used for the session identifier by the application running in an MN.
An MN may be running multiple application sessions,
and each of these sessions can have a different home network.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
</t>
<t hangText='IP prefix/address anchoring:'>
An IP prefix, i.e., Home Network Prefix (HNP),
or address, i.e., Home Address (HoA),
allocated to a mobile node
is topologically anchored to a node
when the anchor node is able to advertise a connected route
into the routing infrastructure for the allocated IP prefix.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
</t>
<t hangText='Internetwork Location Management (LM) function:'>
managing and keeping track of the internetwork location of an MN.
The location information
may be a binding of the IP advertised address/prefix,
e.g., HoA or HNP,
to the IP routing address of the MN
or of a node that can forward packets destined to the MN.
It is a control plane function.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
In a client-server protocol model,
location query and update messages
may be exchanged between a Location Management client (LMc)
and a Location Management server (LMs).
<vspace blankLines="1" />
With separation of control plane and data plane,
the LM function is in the control plane.
It may be a logical function at the control plane node,
control plane anchor, or mobility controller.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
It may be distributed or centralized.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
</t>
<t hangText='Forwarding Management (FM) function:'>
packet interception and forwarding
to/from the IP address/prefix assigned to the MN,
based on the internetwork location information,
either to the destination or to some other network element
that knows how to forward the packets to their destination.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
This function may be used to achieve indirection.
With separation of control plane and data plane,
FM may split
into a FM function in the data plane (FM-DP)
and a FM function in the control plane (FM-CP).
<vspace blankLines="1" />
FM-DP may be distributed with distributed mobility management.
It may be a function in a data plane anchor
or data plane node.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
FM-CP may be distributed or centralized.
It may be a function in a control plane node,
control plane anchor or mobility controller.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
</t>
<!-- sm function (begin) -->
<t hangText='Security Management (SM) function:'>
The security management function controls security mechanisms/protocols providing access control, integrity,
authentication, authorization, confidentiality, etc. for the control plane and data plane.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
This function resides in all nodes such as control plane anchor, data plane anchor, mobile node, and correspondent node.
</t>
<!-- sm function (end) -->
</list>
</t>
</section>
<!-- IP prefix/address anchored in current network of attachment (begin section) -->
<section anchor="sec:af-in-net-attach"
title="IP prefix/address anchored in current network of attachment">
<t>
The IP prefix/address at the MN's side of a flow
may be anchored at the access router
to which the MN is attached.
</t>
<t>
For example,
when an MN attaches to a network (Net1)
or moves to a new network (Net2),
it is allocated an IP prefix from that network.
It configures from this prefix an IP address
which is typically a dynamic IP address.
It then uses this IP address
when it a flow is initiated.
Packets to the MN in this flow
are simply forwarded according to the forwarding table.
</t>
<!-- sm function (begin) -->
<!--
<t>
The security management function in the IP anchoring node
at a new network must assign a valid IP prefix to a mobile node.
In the example,
the security management function
in the node anchoring address IP2
assigns the valid IP prefix for the mobile node.
</t>
-->
<!-- sm function (end) -->
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
Net1 Net2
+---------------+ +---------------+
|AR1 anchors IP1| |AR2 anchors IP2|
+---------------+ +---------------+
+---------------+ +---------------+
|MN(IP1): | |MN(IP2): |
|flow(IP2,...) | or |flow(IP2,...) |
+---------------+ +---------------+
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 1. IP prefix/address anchored in network of attachment.
MN is attached to AR1 in Net1 where it has initiated a flow using IP1
or has moved to AR2 in Net2 where it initiates a new flow using IP2.</postamble>
</figure>
<t>
There may be multiple IP prefixes/addresses to choose from.
They may be from the same access network or different access networks.
The network may advertise these prefixes with cost options
<xref target="I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost" />
so that the mobile node may choose the one with the least cost.
In addition, these IP prefixes/addresses may be of different types
regarding whether mobility support is needed
<xref target="I-D.dmm-ondemand-mobility-api" />.
A flow will need to choose the appropriate one
according to whether it needs IP mobility support.
</t>
<t>
With on-demand mobility,
IP mobility support is provided only when needed
instead of being provided by default.
</t>
<!-- Changing to the new IP prefix/address (begin section) -->
<section anchor="sec:changing-anchor"
title="Changing to the new IP prefix/address">
<t>
A straightforward choice of mobility anchoring
is for a flow to use the IP prefix of the network
to which the MN is attached
when the flow is initiated
<xref target="I-D.seite-dmm-dma" />.
This is shown in Figure 2.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
Net1 Net2
+---------------+ +---------------+
|AR1 anchors IP1| |AR2 anchors IP2|
+---------------+ +---------------+
+...............+ move +---------------+
.MN(IP1): . =======> |MN(IP2): |
.flow(IP1,...) . |flow(IP2,...) |
+...............+ +---------------+
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 2. Changing to the new IP prefix/address.
MN running a flow using IP1 in Net1
changes to running a flow using IP2 in Net2.</postamble>
</figure>
<t>
When IP mobility is not provided to a specific flow,
the flow may use a new IP address acquired from a new network
as the MN moves to the new network.
</t>
<t>
Regardless of whether IP mobility is needed,
if the flow has terminated
before the MN moves to a new network,
the flow may subsequently restart
using the new IP address allocated from the new network.
</t>
<t>
When session continuity is needed,
even if a flow is ongoing as the MN moves,
it may still be desirable
for the flow to change to using the new IP prefix
configured in the new network.
The flow may then close
and then restart using a new IP address configured
in the new network.
Yet such a change in flow may be using a higher layer mobility support
which is not in the scope of this document
to change the IP address of the flow.
</t>
<t>
In Figure 2,
a flow initiated while the MN was in Net1
has terminated
before the MN moves to a new network Net2.
After moving to Net2,
the MN uses the new IP prefix anchored in Net2
to start a new flow.
The packets may then be forwarded
without requiring IP layer mobility support.
</t>
<t>
The call flow is outlined in Figure 3.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
MN p-AR n-AR CN
|MN attaches to p-AR: | | |
|acquire MN-ID and profile | |
|--RS---------------->| | |
| | | |
|<----------RA(HNP1)--| | |
| | | |
Allocated prefix P1
IP1 address configuration
| | | |
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+--------------------------------------------->|
| | | |
|MN detach from p-AR | | |
|MN attach to n-AR | | |
| | | |
|--RS------------------------------>| |
| | | |
|<--------------RA(HNP2)------------| |
| | | |
Allocated prefix P2
IP2 address configuration
| | | |
|<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+------------------------------->|
| | | |
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 3.
A flow uses the IP allocated from the network
at which the MN is attached
when the flow is initiated.
</postamble>
</figure>
<!-- sm function (begin) -->
<t>
The security management function in the anchor node at a new network
must allow to assign a valid IP prefix/address to a mobile node.
</t>
<!-- sm function (end) -->
<t>
When IP mobility is needed for a flow,
the mobility support may be provided by
moving the IP address anchoring to the new network
to be described in
<xref target="sec:moving-anchor" />
or by using other mobility management methods
(<xref target="Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP" />
and
<xref target="Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review" />)
Then the flow may continue to use the IP prefix from the prior network.
Yet some time later, the flow of a certain user application may be closed.
If the spplication is started again,
the new flow may not need to use the prior network address
to avoid having to invoke IP mobility support.
This is the case when the use of a permanent IP prefix/address is not needed.
The flow may then use the new IP prefix
in the network where the flow is initiated.
Routing is again kept simpler without employing IP mobility
and will remain so as long as the MN has not moved away from that network.
</t>
<t>
The call flow in this case is outlined in Figure 4.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
MN p-AR n-AR CN
|MN attaches to p-AR: | | |
|acquire MN-ID and profile | |
|--RS---------------->| | |
| | | |
|<----------RA(HNP1)--| | |
| | | |
Allocated prefix P1
IP1 address configuration
| | | |
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+--------------------------------------------->|
| | | |
|MN detach from p-AR | | |
|MN attach to n-AR | | |
| | | |
|--RS------------------------------>| |
Moving IP2 anchoring to n-AR to be described in next sub-section
|<--------------RA(HNP2,P1)---------| |
| | | |
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------+------------------------------->|
| | | |
Allocated prefix P2
IP2 address configuration
| | | |
Flow(IP1,IPcn) teminates
| | | |
|<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+------------------------------->|
| | | |
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 4.
A flow uses the IP allocated from the network
at which the MN is attached
when the flow is initiated.
</postamble>
</figure>
<!-- Changing to a new IP prefix/address (end section) -->
</section>
<!-- Moving the IP prefix/address anchor to the new network (begin section) -->
<section anchor="sec:moving-anchor"
title="Moving the IP prefix/address anchor to the new network">
<t>
The IP prefix/address anchor may move
without changing the IP prefix/address of the flow.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
Net1 Net2
+---------------+ +---------------+
|LM:IP1<-->IPar2| |LM:IP1<-->IPar2|
|FM:DHCPv6-PD | | |
|---------------| move |---------------|
|AR1 anchors IP1| =======> |AR2 anc IP1,IP2|
+---------------+ +---------------+
+...............+ +---------------+
.MN(IP1): . move |MN(IP1,IP2): |
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) |
+...............+ +---------------+
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 5. Moving the IP prefix/address anchor to the new network.
MN with flow using IP1 in Net1
continues to run the flow using IP1
as it moves to Net2.</postamble>
</figure>
<t>
As an MN with an ongoing session
moves to a new network,
the flow may preserve session continuity
by moving the original IP prefix/address of the flow to the new network.
An example
is in the use of BGP UPDATE messages
to change the forwarding table entries
as described in
<xref target="I-D.mccann-dmm-flatarch" />
and also for 3GPP Evolved Packet Core (EPC) network in
<xref target="I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc" />.
</t>
<t>
The security management function in the anchor node at a new network
must allow to assign the original IP prefix/address
used by the mobile node at the previous (original) network.
As the assigned original IP prefix/address is to be used in the new network,
the security management function in the anchor node
must allow to advertise the prefix of the original IP address
and also allow the mobile node to send and receive data packets
with the original IP address.
</t>
<t>
The security management function in the mobile node
must allow to configure the original IP prefix/address
used at the previous (original) network
when the original IP prefix/address is assigned
by the anchor node in the new network.
The security management function in the mobile node
also allows to use the original IP address for the previous flow in the new network.
</t>
<!-- Centralized control plane (begin section) -->
<section anchor="sec:moving-anchor-central-CP"
title="Centralized control plane">
<t>
An example of moving the IP prefix is in the case where
Net1 and Net2 both belong to the same operator network
with separation of control and data planes
(<xref target="I-D.liu-dmm-deployment-scenario" />
and
<xref target="I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc" />),
where the controller may send to the switches/routers
the updated information of the forwarding tables
with the IP addressing anchoring of the original IP prefix/address at AR1
moved to AR2 in the new network.
That is, the IP address anchoring in the original network
which was advertising the prefix
will need to move to the new network.
As the anchoring in the new network
advertises the prefix of the original IP address
in the new network,
the forwarding tables will be updated
so that packets of the flow
will be forwarded according to the updated forwarding tables.
Figure 6 shows such a case where the functions LM, FM-CP are centralized
whereas the FM-DP's are distributed.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
Net1 Net2
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| LM:IP1<-->IPar2 |
| FM-CP |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------+ +---------------+
|FM-DP:DHCPv6-PD| |FM-DP |
|---------------| move |---------------|
|AR1 anchors IP1| =======> |AR2 anc IP1,IP2|
+---------------+ +---------------+
+...............+ +---------------+
.MN(IP1): . move |MN(IP1,IP2): |
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) |
+...............+ +---------------+
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 6. Moving the IP prefix/address anchor to the new network
and with LM and FM-CP in a centralized control plane
whereas the FM-DP's are distributed.</postamble>
</figure>
<t>
The call flow in Figure 7 shows
that MN is allocated HNP1 when it attaches to the p-AR.
A flow running in MN may or may not need IP mobility.
If it does, it may continue to use the previous IP prefix.
If it does not, it may use a new IP prefix allocated from the new network.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
MN p-AR n-AR DHCP Servers CN
|MN attaches to p-AR: | | | |
|acquire MN-ID and profile | | |
|--RS---------------->| | | |
|<----------RA(HNP1)--| | | |
| | | Allocate MN-HNP1 |
IP addr config | | | |
| | | | |
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+--------------------------------------------->|
| | | | |
|MN detach from p-AR | | | |
|MN attach to n-AR | | | |
| | | | |
|--RS(HNP1)------------------------>| | |
| | | | |
| |------DHCPv6 release-------------->| |
| | | | |
| | |--DHCPv6 PD request->| |
| | |<-DHCPv6 PD reply--->| |
| | | | |
| BGP route updates | |
| | | | |
|<--------------RA(HNP2,HNP1)-------| | |
| | | Allocate MN-HNP2 |
IP addr config | | | |
| | | | |
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------+------------------------------->|
| | | | |
| Flow(IP1,IPcn,...) terminates | | |
| | | | |
| | DHCPv6-PD timeout | |
| | | | |
| BGP route updates | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+------------------------------->|
| | | | |
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 7. DMM solution.
MN with flow using IP1 in Net1
continues to run the flow using IP1
as it moves to Net2.</postamble>
</figure>
<t>
As the MN moves from p-AR to n-AR,
the p-AR as a DHCP client may send a DHCP release message to release the HNP1.
It is now necessary for n-AR to learn the IP prefix of the MN from the previous network
so that it will be possible for Net2 to allocate both the previous network prefix
and the new network prefix.
MN may provide its previous network prefix information
by including it to the RS message
<xref target="I-D.jhlee-dmm-dnpp" />.
</t>
<t>
Knowing that MN is using HNP1,
the n-AR sends to a DHCP server a DHCPv6-PD request to move the HNP1 to n-AR.
The server sends to n-AR a DHCPv6-PD reply to move the HNP1.
Then BGP route updates will take place here.
</t>
<t>
In addition,
the MN also needs a new HNP in the new network.
The n-AR may now send RA to n-AR,
with prefix information that includes
HNP1 and HNP2.
The MN may then continue to use IP1.
In addition,
the MN is allocated the prefix HNP2
with which it may configure its IP addresses.
Now for flows using IP1,
packets destined to IP1
will be forwarded to the MN via n-AR.
</t>
<t>
As such flows have terminated and DHCP-PD has timed out,
HNP1 goes back to Net1.
MN will then be left with HNP2 only,
which it will use when it now starts a new flow.
</t>
</section>
<!-- Centralized control plane (end section) -->
<!-- Hierarchical network (begin section) -->
<section anchor="sec:moving-anchor-hierarchical-network"
title="Hierarchical network">
<t>
A hierarchy may also exist as shown the Figure 8.
Here the IP prefix allocated to the MN is anchored at an edge router (ER)
supporting multiple access routers to which the MN may be attached.
Mobility of the MN involving change of AR but not of ER
may be accomplished using tunneling between the ER and the AR
or using some other L2 mobility mechanism.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
Net1 Net2
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| LM:IP1<-->IPar2 |
| FM-CP |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------+
|FM-DP |
|---------------|
|ER1 anchors IP1|
+---------------+
+---------------+ +---------------+
|FM-DP | |FM-DP |
|---------------| move |---------------|
|AR1 | =======> |AR2 |
+---------------+ +---------------+
+...............+ +---------------+
.MN(IP1): . move |MN(IP1) |
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) |
+...............+ +---------------+
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 8. Mobility without involving change of IP anchoring
in a network with hierarchy in which the IP prefix allocated to the MN
is anchored at an Edge Router supporting multiple access routers
to which the MN may connect to.
</postamble>
</figure>
<t>
The mobility event shown in Figure 9 involves a change of the IP prefix anchoring.
ER1 acting as a DHCP-PD client may exchange message with the DHCP server
to release the prefix IP1.
Meanwhile, ER2 acting as a DHCP-PD client may exchange message
with the DHCP server to delegate the prefix IP1 to ER2.
</t>
<figure>
<preamble></preamble>
<artwork><![CDATA[
Net1 Net2
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| LM:IP1<-->IPar2 |
| FM-CP |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------+
|FM-DP |
|---------------|
|GW |
+---------------+
+---------------+ +---------------+
|FM-DP:DHCPv6-PD| |FM-DP |
|---------------| move |---------------|
|ER1 anchors IP1| =======> |ER2 anc IP1,IP2|
+---------------+ +---------------+
+---------------+ +---------------+
|FM-DP | |FM-DP |
|---------------| |---------------|
|AR1 | |AR2 |
+---------------+ +---------------+
+...............+ +---------------+
.MN(IP1): . move |MN(IP1,IP2): |
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) |
+...............+ +---------------+
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Figure 9. Mobility involving change of IP anchoring
in a network with hierarchy in which the IP prefix allocated to the MN
is anchored at an Edge Router supporting multiple access routers.
to which the MN may connect to.
</postamble>
</figure>
</section>
<!-- Hierarchical network (end section) -->
<!-- Moving the IP prefix/address anchor to the new network (end section) -->
</section>
<!-- IP prefix/address anchored in current of attachment (end section) -->
</section>
<section anchor="security" title="Security Considerations">
<t>TBD</t>
</section>
<section title="IANA Considerations">
<t>This document presents no IANA considerations.</t>
</section>
<section title="Contributors">
<t>This document is an attempt
to harmonize the different distributed mobility solutions
in a number of other drafts.
These drafts cited in this document
are the work of their many authors/co-authors.
While some of them have taken the work to jointly write this document,
others have contributed at least indirectly by writing these drafts.
The latter include
Carlos J. Bernardos,
Philippe Bertin,
Hui Deng,
Fabio Giust,
Dapeng Liu,
Satoru Matushima,
Peter McCann,
Antonio de la Oliva,
Behcet Sarikaya,
Pierrick Seite,
Li Xue,
Ryuji Wakikawa,
and
Younghan Kim.
</t>
<t>Valuable comments have also been received from John Kaippallimil and ChunShan Xiong.
</t>
</section>
</middle>
<back>
<references title="Normative References">
&rfc2119;
<?rfc include="reference.RFC.6275.xml" ?>
<?rfc include="reference.RFC.5213.xml" ?>
<?rfc include="reference.RFC.7333.xml" ?>
<?rfc include="reference.RFC.7429.xml" ?>
<!--
<?rfc include="reference.RFC.6241.xml" ?>
-->
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.dmm-ondemand-mobility-api.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.jhlee-dmm-dnpp.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.seite-dmm-dma.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.mccann-dmm-flatarch.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.liu-dmm-deployment-scenario.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc.xml"?>
<!--
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.bernardos-dmm-cmip.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmip.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi.xml"?>
<?rfc include="reference.I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring.xml"?>
-->
</references>
<references title="Informative References">
<reference anchor="Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review">
<front>
<title>Distributed and Dynamic Mobility Management in Mobile Internet: Current Approaches and Issues</title>
<author initials="H" surname="Chan">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="H" surname="Yokota">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="J" surname="Xie">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="P" surname="Seite">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="D" surname="Liu">
<organization />
</author>
<date month="February" year="2011" />
</front>
</reference>
<reference anchor="Paper-Distributed.Mobility">
<front>
<title>Distributed IP Mobility Management from the Perspective of the IETF: Motivations, Requirements, Approaches, Comparison, and Challenges</title>
<author initials="J" surname="Lee">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="J" surname="Bonnin">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="P" surname="Seite">
<organization />
</author>
<author initials="H" surname="Chan">
<organization />
</author>
<date month="October" year="2013" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="" value="IEEE Wireless Communications" />
</reference>
<reference anchor="Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP">
<front>
<title>Proxy Mobile IP with Distributed Mobility Anchors</title>
<author initials="H" surname="Chan">
<organization />
</author>
<date month="December" year="2010" />
</front>
<seriesInfo name="" value="Proceedings of GlobeCom Workshop on Seamless Wireless Mobility" />
</reference>
</references>
</back>
</rfc>
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 08:17:06 |