NEMO Working Group C. Ng Internet-Draft Panasonic Singapore Labs Expires: January 7, 2008 July 6, 2007 Consumer Electronics Requirements for Network Mobility Route Optimization draft-ng-nemo-ce-req-00 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 January 7, 2008. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 1] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 Abstract This document illustrates different deployments of Network Mobility (NEMO) from the consumer electronics perspective. From these deployments, a set of requirements is deduced for Route Optimization (RO) with NEMO. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Deployments of Personal Mobile Router . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Simple Personal Area Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. Personal Mobile Router in a Car . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3. Residence Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Consumer Electronics Requirements for Route Optimization . . . 7 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.1. Normative Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.2. Informative Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12 Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 2] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 1. Introduction Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support [3] allows a whole network to change its point of attachment while maintaining reachability and session continuity. [4] and [5] investigate the inefficiencies in NEMO Basic Support, and analyze the solution space for Route Optimization (RO) with NEMO from a technical perspective. This document explores the different deployment scenarios of NEMO from the perspective of consumer electronics. This mainly entails a personal device, called the Personal Mobile Router, as the primary node which a user utilizes to allow the user's other devices to communicate with other nodes in the global Internet. This is detailed in Section 2. From these deployments, a set of requirements is inferred in Section 3. It is expected for readers to be familiar with terminologies related to mobility in [1] and NEMO related terms defined in [2]. Interested readers may also refer to [6] and [7] for the requirements from the automobile and aviation industries respectively. Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 3] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 2. Deployments of Personal Mobile Router The Personal Mobile Router is generally envisaged as a mobile communications device, most probably a cellular handphone, with embedded router functionality so as to allow other personal devices (such as MP3 Players, Digital Cameras) to access the global Internet. In such a deployment, it is expected for the Personal Mobile Router to provide all the routing capabilities of the personal area network. This means that one would generally not expect devices (i.e. LFNs) such as digital camera or music players to have routing capabilities. In other words, LFNs are envisaged as simple IPv6 hosts. However, it is possible for there to be a Local Mobile Node (MNN) in the personal area network. For instance, a laptop or a WLAN-enabled PDA can break off from the personal area network and connect to the Internet on its own. Thus, the device becomes a MIPv6 host, with its home address configured from the Mobile Network Prefix of the personal area network. This section illustrates three different deployment scenarios with respect to the Personal Mobile Router. First is a simple personal area network where NEMO services is provided by a service provider (such as an telecommunications operator). Next is the deployment where the Personal Mobile Router is docked within a car and serves as an additional Mobile Router for the car network. The last scenario is the case where the Personal Mobile Router obtains a network prefix not directly from its Internet service providers. Instead, the network prefix is allocated from the user's residence. 2.1. Simple Personal Area Network The simplest deployment is when the Personal Mobile Router is simply used to provide Internet access to other devices in a user's personal area network. This is the case where the user subscribes to a mobility service provider that allocates a network prefix for the user's personal area network. One example of this is the 3GPP Personal Network Management services [8]. For this scenario, typical communications will be audio/video streaming from a multimedia content server to the music/video player in the user's personal area network. This is a case of communications between a LFN with a CN in the global internet. An alternative situation will be communications between devices from two (or more) different personal area networks. For example, two different users may engage in a game with their personal entertainment devices (such as Nintendo or Play Station portables), Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 4] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 or share their audio files stored in their music players. This is a case of communications between two LFNs from different NEMO. 2.2. Personal Mobile Router in a Car A second scenario involving the Personal Mobile Router is when the user docks the Personal Mobile Router into a car network. This allows the communications devices in the vehicle to use the Personal Mobile Router to access information from the Internet. It also allows the personal devices in the personal area network to use the Mobile Router in the vehicle network to communicate with correspondent nodes on the Internet. In other words, the two mobile networks (personal area network and vehicle network) merges to form a multihomed network. In such a merged network, the vehicle network devices and the personal area network devices will continue to use their own original network prefixes to communicate with external nodes. Hence, one way to view this is to treat it as if the two Mobile Routers attaches to each other, and uses each other as an additional access router. This implies that the a communication between a MNN and a correspondent node may go through two Mobile Routers (e.g. the communication from the car navigation device to a traffic condition server passes through first the Mobile Router of the car, and then the Personal Mobile Router). Hence, this can be viewed as a case of a nested NEMO. 2.3. Residence Home Network This scenario is a special deployment as it differs from the usual subscription model than is more commonly used. Basically, in this scenario, the home network of the Personal Mobile Router (as far as NEMO is concerned) is literally the "home" -- i.e. the residence of the user. It is envisioned that the user deploys a residence-wide network with a set-top box serving as the gateway. This set-top box is connected to the Internet via broadband connection (cable or ADSL) and obtains an IPv6 prefix from the ISP. Part of the IPv6 prefix obtained is then assigned as the prefix for the user's personal are network (i.e. the Mobile Network Prefix for the personal area network). The set-top box is thus configured as the home agent of the Personal Mobile Router. Typically, the devices in the personal area network (i.e. LFNs) would communicate mostly with other devices in the residence network (e.g. personal video player accessing movie stored in a digital video recorder in the residence). In such situation, route optimization is redundant. However, there exist situations where multiple personal area networks (each belonging to different family members) belong to Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 5] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 the same residence network. Devices from these different personal area networks may communicate with each other often enough. In the latter situation, it is a case of two MNNs from different NEMO communicating with each other. Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 6] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 3. Consumer Electronics Requirements for Route Optimization Not all communications involving personal area network require route optimization. There are, however, two particular use cases where route optimization is highly desirable. The first use case is when devices in a personal area network are used for real time interactive applications which are sensitive to round trip delays. Examples include voice-over-IP communications and multiplayer gaming sessions. This usually entails communications between two devices from two different personal area network, as illustrated in Section 2.1 and Section 2.3. In such cases, there might be two different home agents involved (one for each NEMO), hence making the improvement in delay reduction of route optimization more significant. The second use case is when the home network is congested, or otherwise bandwidth- limited. One example is the residence home network as described in Section 2.3. Most broadband residence access are asymmetrical (i.e. the uplink bandwidth is much smaller than the downlink bandwidth), making it unsuitable for the home agent (e.g. set-top box) to forward large amount of packets to Personal Mobile Routers. Where route optimization is highly desirable, we can infer the following requirements/features from the deployment scenarios described in Section 2. o LFNs should remain unmodified Devices in the personal area network are envisaged as simple IPv6 node. The Personal Mobile Router is expected to provide route optimization services for any consumer electronic devices that connect to its personal area network. Thus, it is expected for LFNs to be unmodified for route optimizations. o Processing load of MR should be as low as possible The Personal Mobile Router is a small mobile device (e.g. handphone) that is limited in battery power. Hence, any route optimization solution should not significantly increases the processing load of the MR. o MR-to-MR route optimization As seen in Section 2, most of the communications we envisaged are in the form of a MNN communicating with another MNN in different personal area networks. As we do not expect MNNs to be involved in route optimization signaling, a suitable route optimization would likely be between the two MRs. Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 7] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 o Nested-NEMO route optimization In Section 2.2, a scenario is illustrated where the Personal Mobile Router is attaching to the car mobile router for Internet access (and vice versa). If the car mobile router performs route optimization for its network, then the Personal Mobile Router can run a separate route optimization session to achieve fully- optimized route. Alternatively, it is also possible for the Personal Mobile Router to support some mechanism that achieve nested-NEMO route optimization. o Security Consideration Security is a prime consideration in the deployment of Personal Mobile Router, since the personal area network may store private information. In general, a personal area network would not allow external devices to attach to the mobile network, hence the Personal Mobile Router will the most important gateway in which security of the personal area network is enforced. As such, any route optimization solution should not expose the Personal Mobile Router to additional risk as compared to NEMO Basic Support. Particularly, it must not be possible for other nodes to claim ownership of the Mobile Network Prefix (in entirety or in parts). Additionally, denail-of service attacks on the Personal Mobile Router (e.g. by forcing the Personal Mobile Router to send a huge amount of signaling packets or to maintain a large number of signaling states) must not be possible. Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 8] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 4. IANA Considerations This is an informational document and does not require any IANA action. 5. Security Considerations Security is a prime consideration in the deployment of Personal Mobile Router. The requirements for security involving the Personal Mobile Router is discussed in Section 3. 6. References 6.1. Normative Reference [1] Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology", RFC 3753, June 2004. [2] Ernst, T. and H. Lach, "Network Mobility Support Terminology", draft-ietf-nemo-terminology-05 (work in progress), March 2006. 6.2. Informative Reference [3] Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and P. Thubert, "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol", RFC 3963, January 2005. [4] Ng, C., Thubert, P., Watari, M., and F. Zhao, "Network Mobility Route Optimization Problem Statement", draft-ietf-nemo-ro-problem-statement-03 (work in progress), September 2006. [5] Ng, C., Thubert, P., Zhao, F., and M. Watari, "Network Mobility Route Optimization Solution Space Analysis", draft-ietf-nemo-ro-space-analysis-02 (work in progress), February 2006. [6] Baldessari, R., "C2C-C Consortium Requirements for Usage of NEMO in VANETs", draft-baldessari-c2ccc-nemo-req-00 (work in progress), February 2007. [7] Eddy, W., "NEMO Route Optimization Requirements for Operational Use in Aeronautics and Space Exploration Mobile Networks", draft-eddy-nemo-aero-reqs-00 (work in progress), April 2007. Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 9] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 [8] "Service requirements for Personal Network Management (PNM)", 3GPP TS 22.259, June 2006. Appendix A. Change Log o draft-ng-nemo-ro-req-00: * Initial version. Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 10] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 2007 Author's Address Chan-Wah Ng Panasonic Singapore Laboratories Pte Ltd Blk 1022 Tai Seng Ave #06-3530 Tai Seng Industrial Estate Singapore 534415 SG Phone: +65 65505420 Email: chanwah.ng@sg.panasonic.com Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 11] Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements July 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). Ng Expires January 7, 2008 [Page 12]