One document matched: draft-haley-mip6-mh-signaling-00.txt


   Mobile IPv6                                                          
   Internet Draft                                              B. Haley 
   Document: draft-haley-mip6-mh-signaling-00.txt       Hewlett-Packard 
                                                                Company 
   Expires: July, 2005                                    February 2005 
    
    
 
                     Mobility Header Signaling Message 
                   draft-haley-mip6-mh-signaling-00.txt 
    
    
Status of this Memo 
    
   By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable 
   patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, 
   and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with 
   RFC 3668. 
    
   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 
    
Copyright Notice 
 
   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved. 
    
    
Abstract 
    
   This document specifies a new Mobility Header message type that can 
   be used between a mobile node and home agent to signal an event that 
   requires attention.  
    
    
Conventions used in this document 
    
 
 
Haley                    Expires - July 2005                 [Page 1] 
                  Mobility Header Signaling Message     February 2005 
 
 
   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 RFC-2119 [1]. 
    
Table of Contents 
    
   1. Introduction...................................................2 
   2. Mobility Header Signaling Message..............................3 
   3. Sending Signaling Messages.....................................4 
   4. Receiving Signaling Messages...................................4 
   5. IANA Considerations............................................4 
   6. Security Considerations........................................5 
   7. References.....................................................5 
      7.1. Normative References......................................5 
      7.2. Informative references....................................5 
   Acknowledgments...................................................5 
   Author's Addresses................................................5 
    
    
1. Introduction 
    
   RFC 3775 [2] contains no provision to allow a home agent to inform a 
   mobile node, or vice-versa, that there is an event that requires its 
   attention.  For example, a home agent may wish to handoff some of its 
   mobile nodes to another home agent because it has come overloaded or 
   it is going offline. 
    
   This protocol describes a generic signaling message type that can be 
   used to send messages between home agents and mobile nodes securely. 
    
   This protocol does not describe the type of messages that might be 
   exchanged, that information should be defined in the document for the 
   specific Mobility option that will be used. 
 















 
 
Haley                    Expires - July 2005                 [Page 2] 
                  Mobility Header Signaling Message     February 2005 
 
 
 
2. Mobility Header Signaling Message 
    
   The Mobility Header Signaling message is used by the home agent to 
   signal the mobile node, or vice-versa, that there is an event that 
   requires attention.  Signaling messages are sent as described in 
   Section 3. 
    
   The message described below follows the Mobility Header format 
   specified in Section 6.1 of [2]: 
    
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    | Payload Proto |  Header Len   |   MH Type     |   Reserved    | 
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    |           Checksum            |                               | 
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               | 
    |                                                               | 
    .                                                               . 
    .                       Message Data                            . 
    .                                                               . 
    |                                                               | 
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
    
   The Signaling Message uses the MH Type value 8 (TBD).  When this 
   value is indicated in the MH Type field, the format of the Message 
   Data field in the Mobility Header is as follows: 
 
    0                   1                   2                   3 
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 
                                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
                                   |            Reserved           | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |                                                               | 
   .                                                               . 
   .                        Mobility options                       . 
   .                                                               . 
   |                                                               | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
 
   Reserved 
 
     16-bit field reserved for future use.  The value MUST be 
     initialized to zero by the sender, and MUST be ignored by the 
     receiver. 
 
 
 
Haley                    Expires - July 2005                 [Page 3] 
                  Mobility Header Signaling Message     February 2005 
 
 
   Mobility options 
    
     Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility 
     Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long.  This field 
     contains zero of more TLV-encoded mobility options.  The encoding 
     and format of defined options MUST follow the format specified in 
     Section 6.2 of [2].  The receiver MUST ignore and skip any options 
     with it does not understand. 
      
     This specification does not define any options valid for the 
     Signaling message. 
    
   If no options are present in this message, no padding is necessary 
   and the Header Len field in the Mobility Header will be set to 0. 
 
 
3. Sending Signaling Messages 
    
   When sending a Signaling message, the sending node constructs the 
   packet as it would any other Mobility Header, except the MH Type 
   field MUST be set to 8 (TBD). 
    
   Signaling messages SHOULD be subject to rate limiting in the same 
   manner as is done for ICMPv6 messages [3]. 
 
 
4. Receiving Signaling Messages 
    
   Upon receiving a Signaling message, the Mobility Header MUST be 
   verified as specified in [2], specifically: 
    
        o The Checksum, MH type, Payload Proto and Header Len fields 
          MUST meet the requirements of Section 9.2 of [2]. 
         
        o The packet MUST be covered by the IPsec ESP SA in place for 
          Binding Updates and Acknowledgements (Section 5.1 of [2]). 
 
   If the packet is dropped due to the above tests, the receiving node 
   MUST follow the processing rules as Section 9.2 of [2] defines.  For 
   example, it MUST send a Binding Error message with the Status field 
   set to 2 (unrecognized MH Type value) if it does not support the 
   message type. 
 
    
5. IANA Considerations 
    
   A new Mobility Header type is required for the following new message 
   described in Section 2: 
    
 
 
Haley                    Expires - July 2005                 [Page 4] 
                  Mobility Header Signaling Message     February 2005 
 
 
     8 Signaling message 
    
    
6. Security Considerations 
    
   As with other messages in [2], the Signaling message MUST use the 
   home agent to mobile node ESP encryption SA for confidentiality 
   protection, and MUST use the home agent to mobile node ESP 
   authentication SA for integrity protection. 
    
    
7. References 
 
7.1. Normative References
                     
   [1]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 
      Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997 
    
   [2]  Johnson, D. Perkins, C., and Arkko, J., "Mobility Support in 
      IPv6", RFC 3775, June, 2004. 
    
   [3] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Internet Control Message Protocol 
      (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) 
      Specification", RFC 2463, December 1998. 
    
7.2. Informative references 
    
    
Acknowledgments 
    
   Thanks to Hui Deng, James Kempf and Vijay Devarapalli for their 
   initial review of the draft. 
    
    
Author's Addresses 
    
   Brian Haley 
   Hewlett-Packard Company 
   110 Spitbrook Road 
   Nashua, NH 03062, USA 
   Email:  Brian.Haley@hp.com 
 
 
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 
 
 
Haley                    Expires - July 2005                 [Page 5] 
                  Mobility Header Signaling Message     February 2005 
 
 
   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 (2004).  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. 
 









 
 
Haley                    Expires - July 2005                 [Page 6] 


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-22 15:19:51