One document matched: draft-cui-netext-lma-redirection-solution-00.txt




NETEXT working group                                              X. Cui
Internet Draft                                                    Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track                           July 27, 2009
Expires: January 2010


                         LMA Redirection Solution
             draft-cui-netext-lma-redirection-solution-00.txt


Status of This Memo                                                  
                                                                     
   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and 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 26 2009.               
                                                                     
Copyright Notice                                                     
                                                                     
   Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   
   document authors. All rights reserved.                            
                                                                     
   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal     
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of    
   publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.

Abstract

   In network-based mobility management domain, LMA is used to manage
   the mobility of IP node attached to MAG. LMA discovery and LMA



Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


   redirection mechanism are used to improve the network flexibility.
   This document is used to introduce a recommended solution for this
   purpose. In this solution Redirect Agent function is adopted to
   accomplish the requirement.
   
Conventions used in this document

   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 [RFC2119].

Table of Contents


   1. Introduction....................................................3
   2. Terminology.....................................................3
   3. Solution Consideration..........................................4
   4. Existing solutions and comparison...............................5
   5. Message and options.............................................6
   6. Conclusion and proposal.........................................7
   7. Security Considerations.........................................7
   8. IANA Considerations.............................................7
   9. Acknowledgments.................................................7
   10. References.....................................................7
      10.1. Normative References......................................7
      10.2. Informative References....................................8
   Author's Addresses.................................................8






















Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


1. Introduction

   LMA redirection is an accepted feature in NETEXT Working Group. By
   this feature, a LMA can re-assign another more appropriate LMA to the
   MAG and the mobile node, when the MAG requests binding to the given
   LMA.

   There are already some documents describing the procedure of LMA
   discovery and LMA redirection, such as [RFC5447], [I-D.ietf-NETLMM-
   LMA-Discovery] and [I-D.ietf-korhonen-redirect].

   [RFC5447] introduces a solution for Home Agent assignment. AAA Client
   can get the Home Agent information from the AAA Server during access
   authentication.

   [I-D.ietf-NETLMM-LMA-Discovery] brings the mechanism into NETLMM
   network. The MAG can also get the LMA information from the AAA Server
   during access authentication.

   [I-D.ietf-korhonen-redirect] introduces some solutions for LMA
   redirection. The precondition is that the redirection functionality
   is enabled in LMA and the principle is that the roLMA forwards the
   PBU message received from a MAG to the rnLMA with the address of
   roLMA attached. PBA message from the rnLMA may be replied to the MAG
   through the roLMA or directly.

   Another one solution is introduced in this document to enrich the LMA
   direction mechanism. The introduced solution is presented in Section
   3. In Section 4, the introduced solution is compared to solutions in
   other documents. New messages and options are introduced in Section 5
   to accomplish the solution. And in Section 6 the conclusion and
   proposal are offered.

2. Terminology

   All the mobility related terms used in this document are to be
   interpreted as defined in the Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213].

   This document also provides the following context-specific
   explanation to the following terms used in this document.

   roLMA

   The old LMA in LMA redirection procedure, which receives the original
   PBU from a MAG and reply a redirect response to recommend an
   alternate candidate LMA.



Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


   rcLMA

   The candidate LMA in LMA redirection procedure, which is supplied in
   the redirect response message to a MAG.

   rnLMA

   The new LMA in LMA redirection procedure, which a MAG was redirected
   to.

3. Solution Consideration

   [RFC5447] provides a mechanism for HA discovery. MIP6-Agent-Info AVP
   is introduced in section 4.2.1 of [RFC5447]. MIP6-Agent-Info AVP is
   used to contain Home Agent information and MIP6-Agent-Info AVP
   contains either the MIP-Home-Agent-Address AVP, the MIP-Home-Agent-
   Host AVP, or both AVPs. Additionally, the MIP-Home-Agent-Host may
   point to a group of HAs located within the same realm and offer an
   additional level of indirection by using the DNS infrastructure.

   This means the MAG may get a group of LMAs located within the same
   realm. So the MAG has two choices when the first requested LMA is not
   appropriate for the binding. MAG may choose the other LMA from the
   LMA group assigned by AAA Server, or request the roLMA to achieve the
   LMA redirection on behalf of the MAG.

   In some scenario the MAG should be aware of the redirection and
   involve in it. In order to avoid the limitation of one choice, the
   MAG may be involved in the indirection procedure, as this document
   introduces.

   In this solution, the MAG inserts an option in the PBU message to
   indicate the concern. When the concern option is attached in the
   received PBU request, the roLMA SHOULD NOT forward the PBU request.
   The roLMA MAY either reply a redirect response with an attached rcLMA
   option to supply a recommended rcLMA, or reply a redirect response
   without rcLMA option to indicate the MAG to achieve the redirection
   procedure by itself. In both cases the final decision and enforcement
   is achieved by the profile in the MAG. The MAG can determine how to
   carry out the LMA redirection procedure and send PBU message to the
   chosen LMA (i.e. the rnLMA). The profile may be to accept the rcLMA
   as the rnLMA, or to try each LMA in the cached LMA list in sequence,
   or to get the rnLMA information in other way.

   The redirect flow is shown in Figure 1.




Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


      MAG         roLMA        rnLMA

       |            |            |
       |            |            |
   a.  |----PBU---->|            | concern option in the PBU message
       |            |            |
   b.  |<-Redirect--|            | rcLMA in the Redirect Reponse or not
       |            |            |
   c.  |            |            | profile in MAG enforced
       |            |            |
   d.  |-----------PBU---------->| rnLMA is the destination of the PBU
       |            |            |
   e.  |<----------PBA-----------| normal binding procedure
       |            |            |
   f.  |<==========data=========>|
       |            |            |
   g.  |-----------PBU---------->|
       |            |            |
   h.  |<----------PBA-----------|

          Figure 1. redirection flow

   The detailed descriptions are as follows:

   a. MAG initiates a binding with a concern option in the PBU message;

   b. The roLMA replies a redirect response to indicate the redirection,
      rcLMA option in or not in the response message;

   c. The profile in MAG is enforced and the rnLMA is determined;

   d. MAG initiates a new binding towards rnLMA;

   e. rnLMA replies PBA as specified in [RFC5213];

   f~h. Data transmission and binding as normal procedure in [RFC5213].

4. Existing solutions and comparison

   [I-D.ietf-korhonen-redirect] provides a forwarding redirection
   solution, while this document introduces a reply redirection
   solution.

   The difference between the two solutions is that, MAG works as Proxy
   Agent in the forwarding redirection solution and as Redirection Agent
   in reply redirection solution.



Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


   Proxy Agent and Redirect Agent are different functionality entities
   exactly. For example, as defined in Diameter Base Protocol [RFC3588],
   Proxy Agent is "in addition to forwarding requests and responses,
   proxies make policy decisions relating to resource usage and
   provisioning", and Redirect Agent is "refer clients to servers and
   allow them to communicate directly".

   The concept of Proxy, Relay and Redirect are exactly different. In
   PMIP domain, the definition is also applicable.

   In the Proxy Agent redirection solution, the MAG can't affect the
   roLMA how to process the LMA redirection. The MAG is excluded in the
   redirection decision-making, although this solution is a little
   quicker.

   In the Redirect Agent redirection solution, the MAG is aware the LMA
   redirection procedure and involves in the redirection
   decision-making. In some scenario, maybe this solution is a better
   way.

   The advantage of Redirect Agent solution includes following:

      1. MAG can involve in the LMA redirection procedure and choose the
         alternate LMA by the preference of itself, but not others.

      2. The redirection function may be concentrated in some capable
         servers (such as AAA Server, DNS server or others), but not
         every LMA node. So the Redirect Agent solution is much easier
         to administrate and maintain for the network operators.

      3. In the Redirect Agent solution, the LMA-LMA protocol between
         nodes in the redirection domain is much easier. The nodes in
         Redirect Agent solution constitute a star network or a tree
         network, while the nodes in Proxy Agent solution constitute a
         full-mesh network. The LMA-LMA protocol is more complex in the
         Proxy Agent redirection solution, because the Proxy LMA must
         know all other LMAs' information to balance the load well.



5. Message and options



   TBD.




Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


6. Conclusion and proposal

   The Proxy Agent solution may be used in small-scale network, as a
   distributed solution.

   The Redirect Agent solution may be used in large-scale network, as a
   centralized solution or a client-aware solution.



7. Security Considerations



   TBD.



8. IANA Considerations



   TBD.



9. Acknowledgments



   TBD.



10. References

10.1. Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC5213] Sri, G., Kent, L., Vijay, D. Kuntal, C. and Basavaraj, P.,
             "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.


Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft          LMA redirection solution               July 2009


   [RFC5447] Jouni, K., Julien, B., Hannes, T., Charles, P. and Kuntal
             C., "Diameter Mobile IPv6: Support for Network Access
             Server to Diameter Server Interaction", RFC 5447, February
             2009.

   [I-D.ietf-NETLMM-LMA-Discovery]
             Jouni, K. and Vijay, D. ''LMA Discovery for Proxy Mobile
             IPv6'', draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery-00.txt, May 2009.

   [I-D.ietf-korhonen-redirect]
             Jouni, K., Sri, G. and Hidetoshi, Y., ''Runtime LMA
             Assignment Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6'', draft-korhonen-
             netext-redirect-02.txt, May 2009



10.2. Informative References

   [RFC3588] Pat, C., John, L., Jari, A., Erik, G. and Glen, Z.,
             "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC3588, September, 2003.







Author's Addresses

   Xiangsong Cui
   Huawei Technologies
   KuiKe Bld., No.9 Xinxi Rd.,
   Shang-Di Information Industry Base,
   Hai-Dian District, Beijing, P.R. China, 100085

   Email: Xiangsong.Cui@huawei.com












Cui                     Expires January 26, 2010                [Page 8]


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-24 08:00:56