One document matched: draft-wakikawa-netext-lma-reliability-01.txt

Differences from draft-wakikawa-netext-lma-reliability-00.txt




NETEXT Working Group                                         R. Wakikawa
Internet-Draft                                                Toyota ITC
Intended status: Standards Track                                  J. Xia
Expires: April 26, 2010                                           Huawei
                                                        October 23, 2009


           PMIP extension to Home Agent Reliability Protocol
                draft-wakikawa-netext-lma-reliability-01

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 April 26, 2010.

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

   This document introduces an extension to the Home Agent Reliability
   protocol standardized in MEXT Working Group for LMA reliability.  In



Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


   Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213], LMA is an anchor which is similar to
   Home Agent of Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775].  Providing LMA reliability is
   achieved with the extensions described in this document.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  LMA Failure Detection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  LMA Virtual Switch Mode  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   5.  LMA Hard Switch Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     5.1.  LMA Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.2.  MAG Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Mobility Options and Messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     6.1.  Proxy Binding Cache Information Mobility Option  . . . . .  8
     6.2.  LMA Failure Indication Mobility Option . . . . . . . . . . 10
     6.3.  LMA Inter Switch Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   7.  IANA considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   8.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   9.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14


























Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


1.  Introduction

   This document specifies small extensions to the Home Agent
   Reliability protocol [ID-HARELIABILITY].  Local Mobility Anchor (LMA)
   acts as an anchor point in Proxy Mobile IPv6, while Home Agent (HA)
   is used in Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775].  Therefore, this specification aims
   to support LMA reliability for Proxy Mobile IPv6.  Since mobility
   managements are not handled by a mobile node, LMA failure and
   recovery must be fully transparent to the mobile node.  All the
   operations defined in this specification are completed between LMA
   and Mobile Access Gateways (MAGs).

   Figure 1 shows the network configuration of LMAs in a Proxy Mobile
   IPv6 domain.  MN1 and MN2 anchor on LMA1 and LMA2 respectively, but
   share one common MAG.  LMA1' is a standby LMA for LMA1, they share
   same address (i.e.LMAA1).  Hence it is assume that the pair execute
   as virtual-swith mode for MN1; While LMA2' is a standby LMA for LMA2,
   they own individual address (i.e.LMAA2 and LMAA2').  The pair execute
   as hard-switch mode for MN2.

             +--Virtual--+            +---Hard---+
            +----+   +-----+        +----+   +-----+
            |LMA1|   |LMA1'|        |LMA2|   |LMA2'|
            +----+   +-----+        +----+   +-----+
     LMAA1 -> | LMAA1 ->|     LMAA2-> | LMAA2'-> |
              |         |             |          |
              \\       ||            //        //
               \\      ||           //       //
                \\     ||          //      //
             +---\\--- ||---------//---- //-------+
            (     \\   ||        //    //         )
            (      \\  \\       //   //          )
             +------\\--||-----//---//----------+
                     \\ ||    //  //
                      \\||   // //
                       \\\\ ////
             Proxy-CoA --> |
                        +-----+
                        | MAG |-----{MN2}
                        +-----+    |
                           |       |
              MN-HNP1 -->  |     MN-HNP2
                         {MN1}

             Figure 1: LMA Network Configuration

   Besides the failure detection mechanism specified in
   [ID-HARELIABILITY], there exists other specific mechanism for LMA



Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


   failure detection.  A detailed description will be given in Section
   3.  The Home Agent Reliability protocol has a hard-switch and
   virtual-switch operational modes, and this specification supports
   both of them.  All the assumptions are same as [ID-HARELIABILITY]
   such as IPsec synchronization, same LMA Address configuration in
   virtual-switch mode, etc.  For example, if LMAA1 and LMAA1' are same
   address, the operation can be virtual-switch mode.  On the other
   hand, if they are different, it should be hard-switch mode.  Detailed
   operations will be given in Section 4 and Section 5.  While a
   detailed description of new mobility option and message will be given
   in Section 6.


2.  Terminology

   The keywords "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].

   All terms in this document are defined in[RFC5213], [ID-HEARTBEAT]
   and [ID-HARELIABILITY].  In addition or in replacement of these, the
   following terms are defined or redefined:

   Current LMA

      A LMA that is currently serving the MAGs.  When the tunnel failure
      is caused by path between the LMA and MAG fail, the LMA maybe
      still keep active but not serving MAG.


3.  LMA Failure Detection

   LMA Failure events used in the Local Mobility Anchor Reliability
   protocol are listed below.

   Detection Mechanism    in section 7.2 of  [ID-HARELIABILITY]

      Three mechanisms are defined in [ID-HARELIABILITY] such as Loss of
      HA-HELLO, Monitored Server Failure by the Active HA, Routing Peer/
      Link Failure.  Each LMA should exchange HA-HELLO for failure
      detection.

   Heartbeat Mechanism for Proxy Mobile IPv6     in section 3.1 of
      [ID-HEARTBEAT]

      In Proxy Mobile IPv6, both LMA and MAG should involve in detecting
      LMA failure.  Heartbeat mechanism specified in section 3.1
      [ID-HEARTBEAT] can be used as an indication of LMA failure.  If a



Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


      LMA detects the tunnel failure with one, some or all MAGs, it can
      treats this events as a hint of LMA failure.  However, the LMA
      SHOULD NOT start the failover as soon as it detects the failure
      events by using heartbeat detecting mechanism.  It is because the
      heartbeat detecting mechanism detects only the tunnel failure.
      The tunnel failure might be caused by the path between MAG and LMA
      failure or other reasons than LMA failure.  In case of path
      failure,it is likely that virtual-switch mode does not help.  The
      assumption is that in virtual-switch mode the LMA and LMA' share
      the same LAN or the subnet, which would mean both get unreachable
      when path dies.  Therefore, heartbeat detecting mechanism only fit
      for the hard-switch mode.  If a MAG detects LMA failure, it can
      solicit a standby LMA to recover the current LMA.  MAG cannot
      reach to the standby LMA until the standby LMA completes taking
      over the current LMA.


4.  LMA Virtual Switch Mode

   In the virtual-switch mode, each LMA is configured with a same LMA
   address (LMAA).  A standby LMA MUST support the IPsec states and
   Proxy Binding Cache information synchronization functionality for
   this virtual switch mode.  However, the scope of LMA Reliability
   protocol is limited to the management of Proxy Mobile IPv6 related
   states.  Thus, only Proxy Binding Cache information synchronization
   is token into account and given description in section 6.1.  As soon
   as LMA failure is detected, the standby LMA becomes active and takes
   over the failed LMA as defined in[ID-HARELIABILITY].


5.  LMA Hard Switch Mode

   In the hard-switch mode, each LMA is configured with different LMA
   address (LMAA).  A standby LMA should creates security association
   with MAGs beforehand, and it must launch Proxy Binding Cache
   information synchronization as same as in virtual switch mode.  It
   can also establishes a tunnel with MAGs before LMA failure.

   In this case that LMA-HELLO mechanism is employed in LMA failure
   detection, the concrete procedure of LMA hard-switch is similar to
   operation specified in [ID-HARELIABILITY].  As soon as LMA failure is
   detected, the standby LMA should send HA switch message to each MAG
   for which the current LMA served.  Note that HA switch message is
   sent for per MAG than per MN attched on the MAG.  Even so, if there
   are large amounts of MAGs served by the failed LMA, the overhead
   caused by sending HA Switch messages is still non-negligible.

   In this case that Heartbeat Mechanism defined in [ID-HEARTBEAT] is



Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


   employed in LMA failure detection, MAG needs to actively involve in
   detecting LMA failure.  After a MAG establishes IPsec/IKE states with
   all the LMAs in the redundant LMA set beforehand, MAG needs to
   trigger heartbeat exchanges with each LMA respectively for checking
   peers reachability.  If the path between MAG and LMA fails rather
   than LMA fails, it will result mobility session discontinuity for MAG
   attached on LMA.  However, the LMA is still active.  In this case,
   LMA-HELLO mechanism cannot detect the failure, and more further
   considerations are needed.

   The following subsections will only focus on the concrete solution to
   solve this problem of the tunnel failure.

5.1.  LMA Operation

   If a MAG detects a path failure with the current LMA, the MAG SHOULD
   solicit a standby LMA, with which MAG pre-establishes IPsec/IKE
   state.

   Usually the current LMA can also detect the path failure using the
   heartbeat mechanism [ID-HEARTBEAT].  However the current LMA MUST NOT
   solicit the standby LMA to takeover itself because the unreachability
   may be caused by a MAG failure, and the current LMA should not know
   whether the path between the MAG and the standby LMA is active or
   not.

   Upon receiving PBU message from the MAG with LMA failure indication,
   the standby LMA MUST include Proxy-CoA of MAG in LMA Inter
   SwitchRequest Message as specified in section 6.3 to notify the
   current LMA that packets of the MAG will be routed to the standby LMA
   instead of the current LMA.  Whereas in this case, the current LMA
   should not transit to standby state and still provide mobile service
   for other reachable MAGs.  At that time, two LMA are both available
   for different MAGs respectively.  More details are shown in Figure 2.

















Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


     MAGs      LMA1(Current)  LMA2(Standby)
      |           |           |
      |           X           |
      |---------------------->| 1. Sending PBU message (with LMA
      |           X           |    failure indication)
      |           X           |
      |           X<----------| 2. LMA2 sends LMA Inter Switch Request (with PCoA option)
      |           X---------->| 3. LMA1 sends LMA Inter Switch Reply
      |           X           |
      |<----------------------| 4. Binding PBA message
      |           X           |
      |           X<----------| 5. LMA2 sends LMA Inter Switch Complete (optional)
      |           X           |
      |           X           |    RECOVERY COMPLETE


         Figure 2: LMA Opertation in LMA Hard Switch

   In case that the tunnel failure is caused by broken LMA1, but not by
   the path between the MAG and the current LMA, step2 & step3 would not
   work at all and can be skipped.

5.2.  MAG Operation

   MAG needs to discover multiple LMA addresses, according to the
   multiple LMAs discovery specified in section 2.2 of
   [ID-LMADISCOVERY], MAG can discover more than one LMA in a PMIP
   domain based on LMA FQDN if operator actually configures its DNS in
   such way.  Afterward, MAG authenticates itself to multiple LMAs and
   creates IPsec SAs with them as defined in [ID-HARELIABILITY].

   When MAG sends heartbeat request message to active LMA beyond
   MISSING_HEARTBEATS_ALLOWED amount without response, MAG concludes
   that the current LMA is unreachable.  In this case, MAG indictates
   current LMA failure to a reachable standby LMA and solicits the
   standby LMA to takeover the current LMA.  It is important to remark
   that MAG sending PBU per MN will introduce high overhead.  Therefore,
   bulk registration mechanism specified in [ID-BULKREGISTER] is
   recommended to mitigate the overhead.  Even so, the overhead is still
   unavoidable in the case that there are large amounts of MAGs served
   by the current LMA.

   MAG initiates proxy binding update message to the standby LMA with
   LMA failure indication.  Standby LMA MUST respond proxy binding
   aknowledge message until standby LMA completes taking over the
   current LMA.  The overview of operation is shown in Figure 3.





Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


     MAG      LMA1(Current)  LMA2(Standby)
      |           |           |
      |<--------------------->| 1. IKEv2 exchange
      |---------->|           | 2. Proxy Binding Update
      |           |           | 3. LMA1 allocate MN-HNP, Setup BCE
      |<----------|           | 4. Proxy Binding Acknowledgment
      |           |           |
      |<--------------------->| 5. IKEv2 exchange
      |           |           |
      |           |<--------->| 6. State exchange (proxy binding cache)
      |           |           |
      |<--------->X           | 7. HeartBeat exchange overtime
      |           X           |
      |---------------------->| 8. Proxy Binding Update (with LMA failure
      |           X           |    indication)
      |           X           |
      |<----------------------| 9. Proxy Binding Acknowledgment
      |           X           |
      |           X           |    RECOVERY COMPLETE


          Figure 3: MAG Opertation in LMA Hard Switch


6.  Mobility Options and Messages

6.1.  Proxy Binding Cache Information Mobility Option

   The LMA Reliability protocol extends Binding Cache Information Option
   specified in section 5.2.2 of [ID-HARELIABILITY].

   The proxy binding cache information option has an alignment
   requirement of 4n+2.  The Proxy Binding Cache Information option is
   only valid in a State Synchronization message.  Its format is as
   follows:
















Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


        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

                                       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                       |   Type = TBD  | Length = 40   |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |          Flags                |       Sequence Number         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |          Lifetime             |          Reserved             |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                      Tunnel Interface ID                      |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +                     Proxy Care-of Address                     +
       |                                                               |
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       ~                                                               ~
       ~                                                               ~
       ~                  Mobile Node Mobility Options                 ~
       ~                                                               ~
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


             Figure 4: Proxy Binding Cache Information Option

   Besides of Tunnel Interface ID Option and Proxy Care-of Address
   option, each LMA also MUST carry the Mobile Node Mobility Options in
   Proxy Binding Cache Information Option in the State Synchronization
   message.  Mobile Node Mobility Options are very similar to Mobility
   Options specified in [RFC5213].

   1.  Mobile Node Identifier Option (mandatory)
   2.  Home Network Prefix option (mandatory)
   3.  Access Technology Type option (mandatory)
   4.  Timestamp Option (optional)
   5.  Mobile Node Link-layer Identifier option (optional)
   6.  Link-local Address option (optional)

   All the fields of Mobile Node Mobility Options in Proxy Binding Cache
   information option are copied from the registered proxy binding of
   one or more particular mobile nodes.  The 8-bit Reserved field MUST



Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


   be set to zero.

6.2.  LMA Failure Indication Mobility Option

   The LMA Reliability protocol includes this option in PBU message as
   an indication to the standby LMA that the MAG detected the path
   failure and solicit the standby LMA to takeover the current LMA's
   role.  The LMA Failure Indication mobility option in the PBU MUST
   contain the IPv6 addresses of the current LMA.  The LMA Failure
   Indication mobility option in the PBU MAY contain the IPv4 addresses
   of the current LMA.

   The LMA Failure Indication mobility option has the alignment
   requirement of 4n+2.  There can zero or only one LMA Failure
   Indication mobility option in the PBU.  The format of the LMA Failure
   Indication mobility option is shown below:

        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
                                       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                       |      Type     |     Length    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                    IPv6 current LMA Address                   |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |               Optional IPv4 current LMA Address               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                  Figure 5: LMA Failure Indication Mobility Option

   Type

      8-bit unsigned integer.  TBD

   Length

      8-bit unsigned integer indicating the length in octets of the
      option, excluding the type and length fields.  If the IPv4 LMA
      Addresses are included in the option, the Option Length MUST be
      set to 20.  Otherwise, the Option Length MUST be set to 16.

   IPv6 current LMA Address






Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


      the IPv6 address of the current LMA.

   Optional IPv4 current LMA Address

      the IPv4 address of the current LMA.

6.3.  LMA Inter Switch Message

   The LMA Reliability protocol creats this message for the LMA hard-
   switch, which is similar with HA Control message defined in section
   5.1.2 of[ID-HARELIABILITY].  When a standby LMA receives PBU message
   from a MAG with LMA failure indication, it MUST include Proxy-CoA of
   the MAG in MAG Address Option in LMA Inter Switch Request Message
   (type field of LMA Inter Switch Message is 0) to notify the current
   LMA that packets of the MAG will be routed to the standby LMA instead
   of the current LMA from then on.

   If the current LMA also detects the MAG unreachability using
   heartbeat exchange, the current LMA should log the event and respond
   LMA Inter Switch Reply Message (type field of LMA Inter Switch
   Message is 1) to the standby LMA as soon as receiving LMA Inter
   Switch Request Message from the standby LMA.

         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
                                       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                       |     Type      |   Status      |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       |                         IPv6 MAG Address                      |
       |                                                               |
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                    Optional IPv4 MAG Address                  |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       .                        Mobility options                       .
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                  Figure 6: LMA Inter Switch Message

   Type

      8-bit unsigned integer.  The type value is 0 to indicate as LMA
      Inter Switch Request Message; The type value is 1 to indicate as
      LMA Inter Switch Reply Message.

   MAG Address




Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


      The IPv6 or IPv4 address of the MAG need to switch LMA.  The
      standby LMA should take over all sessions of the MNs attached on
      the MAG.


7.  IANA considerations

   This document defines three new mobility options to the Mobility
   Options registry (in [RFC3775]) for using LMA reliability:

   o  Proxy Binding Cache Information Mobility Option:

      A new mobility option is used to synchronizing Proxy Binding Cache
      information of MAG in State Synchronization message between LMAs.
      This option is specified in section 6.1.

   o  LMA Failure Indication Mobility Option:

      A new mobility option is used to indicate current LMA failure to
      standby LMA.  This option is specified in section 6.2.

   o  LMA Inter Switch Message:

      A new mobility message is used to switch LMA responsibility from a
      current LMA to a standby LMA for MAG.  This message is specified
      in section 6.3.


8.  Security Considerations

   No security vulnerability is introduced in this specification.  All
   the signaling are protected as described in [ID-HARELIABILITY] and in
   [RFC5213].


9.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to specially thank Jouni Kornohen for his
   contributions to this document and detailed reviews.

   The authors also thank the following individuals for their
   contributions, comments and suggestions to this document: Sri
   Gundavelli,etc.


10.  References





Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


10.1.  Normative References

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

   [RFC3775]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.

   [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
              and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.

   [RFC5142]  Haley, B., Devarapalli, V., Deng, H., and J. Kempf,
              "Mobility Header Home Agent Switch Message", RFC 5142,
              January 2008.

   [ID-HARELIABILITY]
              Wakikawa, R., "Home Agent Reliability Protocol",
              draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-04.txt (work in progress),
              July 2008.

   [ID-HEARTBEAT]
              Devarapalli , V., "Heartbeat Mechanism for Proxy Mobile
              IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-04 (work in
              progress), February 2009.

10.2.  Informative References

   [ID-PMIP6-IPv4]
              Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
              Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-09
              (work in progress), January 2009.

   [ID-LMADISCOVERY]
              Korhonen, J. and V. Devarapalli, "LMA Discovery for Proxy
              Mobile IPv6", draft-korhonen-netlmm-lma-discovery-00 (work
              in progress), October 2008.

   [ID-BULKREGISTER]
              Premec, D., Gundavelli, S., and K. Leung, "Bulk Re-
              registration for Proxy Mobile IPv6",
              draft-premec-netlmm-bulk-re-registration-03 (work in
              progress), October 2009.

   [ID-GENERICSIGNALING]
              Haley, B. and S. Gundavelli, "Mobile IPv6 Generic
              Signaling Message",
              draft-ietf-mext-generic-signaling-message-00 (work in
              progress), February 2009.



Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft               LMA Reliability                October 2009


Authors' Addresses

   Ryuji Wakikawa
   Toyota ITC
   465 Bernardo Avenue
   Mountain View, CA  94043
   USA

   Email: ryuji@us.toyota-itc.com


   Jinwei Xia
   Huawei
   Hui Hong Mansion
   Nanjing, Baixia District  210001
   China

   Phone: +86-025-84565890
   Email: xiajinwei@huawei.com
































Wakikawa & Xia           Expires April 26, 2010                [Page 14]



PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-24 13:13:55