One document matched: draft-zhao-netlmm-ra-consideration-01.txt

Differences from draft-zhao-netlmm-ra-consideration-00.txt

Network Working Group                                       Yuankui zhao
Internet-Draft                                Shanghai Huawei Technology
Intended status: Standards Track                            July 9, 2007  
Expires: Jan 10, 2008                                  
                                                        


                  Default gateway consideration for netlmm
                    draft-zhao-netlmm-ra-consideration-01

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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 September 5, 2007.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Trust (2007).


Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 1]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


Abstract

   RA sent to inform MN about the network prefix and gateway existed.But 
   within a netlmm domain,MN should think that it's home network is kept
   unchanged when it is roaming and it's default gateway is unchanged is
   the best.But current the netlmm draft only can make the MN know the 
   home network prefix.It can't give a convience way to make the gateway
   keep unchanged when the MN is roaming within a netlmm domain.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  The source address of RA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.1 The original of this link-local address. . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.2 Let the new access router know this address. . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  IPv4 considerations   . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .  6
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Conclusions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12











Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 2]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


1.  Introduction

   In IPv6 scenario, the RA messages are sent to inform MN about the 
   network prefix and related gateway.And after receiving a RA from a 
   new address, MN would insert that into the default gateway list with
   the compound with that prefix it advisted.
   Within a netlmm domain,MN didn't know anything about the change of 
   the network. Network side keep the MN believe it still always stay 
   in it's home network.
   For achieving this goal, we should always sent the same home prefix 
   to a MN within a netlmm domain. Meanwhile,we also need to keep the 
   default gateway is the same to that MN during this progress.
   But current the netlmm draft only can sent to MN the same home 
   network prefix.It can't give a convience way to make the gateway
   keep unchanged when the MN is roaming within a netlmm domain.
   For this reason,in this draft we provide a method to make MN didn't 
   feel the change of default gateway within a netlmm domain.


1.1.  Terminology

   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 BCP 14 RFC 2119
   [STANDARDS].












Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 3]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


2.  Overview
 
   The source address of RA is the link-local address of the AR.When a 
   MN enter into a network,after it receive the RA messages,it will 
   extract the source address of RA and appended with the prefix in this 
   message to construct an address. When a Neighbour discovery progress 
   aimed to this address is proceeded and that address is certified to 
   be valid,the address will become the default address of this MN.Thus
   if a RA come from the new address,then that new address will be 
   inserted into the default gateway lists of the MN. And when the 
   previous one can't be used again, MN will use a implement method to 
   choose a candidate address to become the new default gateway. Of 
   course, if there is no one is existed,the MN will start a new 
   progress to discover the default gateway.
   For this reason,within a netlmm domain,we should keep the source
   address of the RA sent to MN didn't be changed after that MN has 
   entered into the network.
   As to the detail methods,we think the HA's link-local address is the
   best. Of course,the original link-local address should be kept as 
   the source address of RA next to send to the MN.For keep to use
   that link-local address,a context mechnism is needed,otherwise we 
   can use the AAA to forward it.
   














Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 4]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


3.  The source address of RA

    In IPv6 context,the source address of RA is a link-local address of 
    AR.It's used to formed the candidated dateway by MN.After construct
    a global address,the default gateway selection algorithm is a 
    implementation method.

    Within a netlmm domain,we should keep the address unchanged in order
    to let MN believe it still stay in the original network.And that is 
    it's home network. Otherwise,will accuse the MN initial the new
    router discovery progress to choose a new AR as the default gateway.

    For keep this address the same as that is originally sent to MN.
    Following rule is taken into account:
   
    3.1 The original of this link-local address
    This link-local address can be the link-local address of the MN's HA
    .Or,it can be the same as the link-local address of that initial
    access router provided to MN when it enter into network initiallly. 

    3.2 Let the new access router know this address
    This link-local address can be learnt by new access router via the
    context transfer mechniasm or to download fram AAA.
    To the previous method,that is very easy to understand,but difficult
    to get the consistent agree to deploy the context tranfer mechnism.
    As to the last one,That can be deploied when the context transfer
    mechnism is unaviliable.










Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 5]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


4.  IPv4 considerations
   
   In IPv4 scenario,the default gateway is got automatically via dhcp
   progress by MN if dynamic host configuration is applied.In that case,
   the whole address of the specified default gateway is transfered by 
   DHCP server to MN as the response to it's requirement.Then the MN will
   use this address as the default gateway and finish the arp detection.
   So we have two problem need to be consideration at here. One is to 
   keep the default gateway the same as the initial one when the MN 
   enter into that network.This can be done using the similiar method
   as those introduced in section 2.That original address is transfered
   or shared within a netlmm domain for the same MN.And another problem
   is that the MAC address also need to be kept the same as that the MN
   detect during it enter initially this network.That will depand which
   kind of link type is used by MN.If a IEEE802.3 MAC layer is used,then
   this is necessary,otherwise,maybe this can be omitted.
   Of course,the same problem is also applied to IPv6 scenario when the
   host configuration including the default gateway address is delivered
   via DHCP mechanism.


















Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 6]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


5.  Security Considerations

   All of the progresses and messages used at here is what currently 
   supported by MN.They all can use the current relevent security 
   method to guarantee their security.We didn't introduce and discuss 
   any new security mechnism to this draft.































Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                          [Page 7]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


6.  Conclusions

   The material used to let MN construct default gateway address and the
   default gateway address need to be kept unchanged within a netlmm 
   domain. Some identifier of the default gateway also need to be 
   considered to kept unchanged if necessary within a netlmm domain.
   All of above what we have discussed is aimed to a MN within a netlmm
   domain.Meanwhile the above is applied to P2P link mode.To shared 
   link mode, that will need to be appended in the future.




























Yuankui zhao               Jan 10,2008                         [Page 8]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

    [STANDARDS]
              "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
              Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997,
              <ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2119>.






























Yuankui zhao               Jan 10,2008                         [Page 9]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007

8.  IANA Considerations 
    
    This document has no actions for IANA.



































Yuankui zhao               Jan 10,2008                        [Page 10]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


Authors' Addresses

   Yuankui Zhao
   Shanghai Huawei Technology Co.LTD
   Qian Chang Building
   No.450 Jin Yu Road Pudong
   Shanghai,201206
   china

   Phone:
   Email: John.zhao@huawei.com


























Yuankui zhao               Jan 10,2008                        [Page 11]

Internet-Draft     Default gateway consideration for netlmm    Jul 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   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.

   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, THE IETF TRUST 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.



Intellectual Property

   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
   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.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).





Yuankui zhao              Jan 10,2008                           [Page 12]