One document matched: draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00.txt
Distributed Mobility Managment Working D. Liu
Group H. Deng
Internet-Draft China Mobile
Intended status: Standards Track March 5, 2012
Expires: September 6, 2012
Address Selection for DMM
draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00
Abstract
In DMM scenario, it is possible for the MN to have multiple mobility
anchor points and corresponding prefixes. In that case, MN needs to
know the type of the addresses then it can select the right one for
application to use. This document describes a mechnism to extend RA
message to carry a flag which can be used to identify the nature of
the prefix.
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 [RFC2119].
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2012.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 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
Liu & Deng Expires September 6, 2012 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00 March 2012
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Problem of address selection for DMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Extension to Router Advertisment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Mobile Node Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Liu & Deng Expires September 6, 2012 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00 March 2012
1. Problem of address selection for DMM
As draft-liu-dmm-dynamic-anchor-discussion-00 introduced, there is a
address selection problem for DMM dynamic anchor solution. The
difficulty of this problem is: the MN does not know the difference
between the multiple prefixes. There is no way for the network to
tell the MN the nature of the different prefixes and there is no
standard mechnism for the MN to select the right prefix.
2. Extension to Router Advertisment
Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] extend IPv6 router advertisement message for
movement detection and home agent information broadcasting. This
document proposes to further extend the IPv6 router advertisement
message to carry a flag to identify the nature of the prefix that it
is advertising.
+----------+---------+-------------------+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+----------+-+-+-+---+-------------------+
|Hop Limit |M|O|H|Re-| Router Lifetime|
+----------+-+-+-+---+-------------------+
| Reachable Time |
+----------------------------------------+
| Retrans Timer |
+----------------------------------------+
| Options |
+----------------------------------------+
The H bit is used for indentify that the router advertisment is sent
by a home agent.
+-------------+------------+------------+-+-+-+--+---+
| Type | Length |PrefixLength|L|A|R|T |R- |
+-------------+------------+------------+-+-+-+--+---+
| Valid Lifetime |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| Preferred Lifetime |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| Reserved |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| |
| Prefix |
+----------------------------------------------------+
Liu & Deng Expires September 6, 2012 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00 March 2012
This document proposes to extend the prefix information option to add
a 'T' flag, its definition is as follows:
T (Type):
Type flag. This is a 2 bits flag indentifies the types of the
advertising prefix. The value of this flag could be:
00: Local home network prefix. It means that this prefix is
allocated and advertised by current router which the MN attaches to.
01 : Remote home network prefix. It means that this prefix is
allocated by another router instead of the router that the MN
currently attaches to.
10: Reserved.
11: Reserved.
The mechanism that used for the router to identify the types of the
prefix is out the scope of this document. As an example, the router
can query the policy server to know which router allocates a
particular prefix.
3. Mobile Node Operation
The mobile node knows the types of the prefixes from the T flag of
the router advertisment message. The applications on the mobile node
can use this information to select the right IP address. For
example, for on-going session, application always choose to use the
prefix that it used before it handovers to a new location. For the
newly initiate application, it will use the prefix that allocated by
current router, e.g. local home network prefix. The mobile node can
use advanced socket API to select the proper prefix, for example,
extension to RFC 5014.The detail mechnism is out the scope of this
document.
4. IANA Considerations
This document makes no request of IANA.
Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
RFC.
Liu & Deng Expires September 6, 2012 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft draft-liu-dmm-address-selection-00 March 2012
5. Security Considerations
TBD
6. Acknowledgements
TBD
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
7.2. Informative References
[I-D.draft-seite-dmm-dma-00]
"Distributed Mobility Anchoring", February 2012.
Authors' Addresses
Dapeng Liu
China Mobile
32 Xuanwumen West Street
Beijng, Xicheng District 100053
China
Phone: +86-13911788933
Email: liudapeng@chinamobile.com
Hui Deng
China Mobile
32 Xuanwumen West Street
Beijng, Xicheng District 100053
China
Phone:
Fax:
Email: denghui@chinamobile.com
URI:
Liu & Deng Expires September 6, 2012 [Page 5]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 04:10:54 |