Internet Draft Thomas C. Schmidt
Matthias Waehlisch
Expires: January 2004 FHTW Berlin
July 2003
Seamless Multicast Handover in a
Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Environment (M-HMIPv6)
<draft-schmidt-waehlisch-mhmipv6-00.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1].
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 18, 2004.
Abstract
This document introduces handover mechanisms for mobile IPv6
multicast listeners and mobile multicast senders. Operations are
based on a Mobile IPv6 environment with local mobility anchor points.
These local anchor points are conformal with a Hierarchical Mobile
IPv6 infrastructure.
Handover latencies in the proposed scheme remain bound to local link
switching delay and local IP address updates by means of latency
hiding techniques. The mechanisms described in this document may also
be used for simple seamless handovers in unicast communication.
The M-HMIPv6 protocol operations utilize the existing HMIPv6 and
MIPv6 messages, without defining any new control messages.
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 1]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
Table of Contents
1. Terminology....................................................2
2. Introduction...................................................3
3. Overview of M-HMIPv6...........................................3
3.1 Operations of a multicast listener..........................4
3.2 Operations of a multicast sender............................4
4. Multicast specific supplements.................................6
4.1 M-HMIPv6 flag in MAP option message.........................6
4.2 Use of Home Address option in mobile multicasts.............6
4.3 Binding Cache processing....................................6
4.4 Home Agent Multicast Membership control.....................7
5. Protocol Details...............................................7
5.1 Operations of all Mobile Nodes..............................7
5.2 Mobile multicast listener...................................7
5.2.1 Operations of the Mobile Node.........................8
5.2.2 Operations of the MAP.................................8
5.3 Mobile multicast sender.....................................9
5.3.1 Operations of the Mobile Node.........................9
5.3.2 Operations of the MAP.................................9
5.3.3 Tree initialization procedure........................10
5.4 Protocol Timer.............................................10
6. Security Considerations.......................................10
References.......................................................11
Acknowledgments..................................................11
Author's Addresses...............................................11
A. A Note on Tunneling...........................................12
1. Terminology
The terminology used in this document remains conformal to the
definitions in MIPv6 [4] and HMIPv6 [5].
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 [2].
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 2]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
2. Introduction
Multicast-based packet distribution plays an important role in real-
time applications as it provides the only efficient, scalable
solution for group communication. However, multicasting itself
conceals complex mechanisms for group membership management and
routing, which both are of slow convergence. In conference scenarios
such as voice or video over IP each member commonly operates as
receiver and as sender for multicast based group communication. To
achieve seamless mobility is one of the most challenging and demanded
developments in IP networks today. Real-time scenarios place the
requirement on mobility protocols to limit disruptions to less than
100 ms and delay or jitter disturbances not to exceed 100 ms or 50 ms
respectively. Note that 100 ms is about the duration of a spoken
syllable in real-time audio traffic.
The fundamental approach to deal with mobility in IPv6 [3] is the
Mobile IPv6 Internet Draft [4]. MIPv6 operates address changes on the
IP layer transparent to the transport layer as a device moves from
one network to the other. MIPv6 involves roundtrip messages for
location updates directly with the MNs Home Agent and the
Correspondent Node. As these nodes can be far away, MIPv6 may exhibit
slow handover performance. The Hierarchical Mobility Management
(HMIPv6) Internet Draft [5] introduces a proxy architecture of
Mobility Anchor Points (MAPs) to reduce communication delays with
respect to the HA. In addition the Fast Handover for Mobile IPv6
Internet Draft [6] proposes delay hiding techniques to further reduce
handover times. Neither of the above thoroughly copes with
requirements of multicast under mobility.
This document addresses the issue of extending a HMIPv6 mobility
infrastructure by mechanisms of sending and receiving multicast
traffic for the MN. Local MAPs serve as temporary multicast relays to
hide partly movement, partly handoff latency of the MN. Handover
procedures are designed to limit any disruption or disturbance to the
time scale needed to achieve link-local IP address configuration.
Handover procedures between MAPs solely built on MIPv6 and HMIPv6
signaling are described within this draft.
3. Overview of M-HMIPv6
This multicast mobility scheme is built on a HMIPv6 environment.
HMIPv6 introduces Mobility Anchor Points as proxy elements, which may
be best viewed as functions on regional routers. For implementing
multicast mobility it is advantageous, but not necessary, that these
regional routers provide multicast routing functionality.
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 3]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
In M-HMIPv6 a mobile multicast node uses its local MAP as anchor
point for multicast communication. All multicast traffic is directed
through this MAP using the RCoA as multicast subscriber or source
address. Traffic forwarding between MN and its MAP is done using a
bi-directional tunnel [7].
If a MN changes location within its MAP domain it only registers its
new LCoA with the MAP as defined in [5] without affecting multicast
routing trees. When entering a new MAP domain a MN will learn of M-
HMIPv6 support through router advertisements with MAP option
messages. Multicast handover procedures will occur only if the MN
changes into a new M-HMIPv6 enabled MAP domain and will then shift
multicast traffic from the previous to the current MAP.
A M-HMIPv6-aware MN SHOULD use the MAP for multicast communication.
However, the MN MAY prefer to use its HA as a multicast anchor point,
e.g. in visited networks within its home site. A mobile node, which
is not M-HMIPv6 aware, will not use its MAP as a multicast anchor
point, but will use the MIPv6 tunnel through the HA instead. In this
sense M-HMIPv6 is simply a smooth extension of HMIPv6, which itself
smoothly extends MIPv6.
3.1 Operations of a multicast listener
To join a multicast group away from home the MN tunnels the MLD
listener report to its current MAP using RCoA as source address. The
MAP records the group address in its Binding Cache in order to
forward multicast packets to the MN and to subscribe for and preserve
MNs multicast group membership.
When changing its MAP domain the MN submits a Binding Update with its
new LCoA to the previous MAP in addition to regular HMIPv6 handover
signaling. On its reception the previous MAP redirects forwarding
multicast packets to the MN's new LCoA.
If multicast support is advertised in the new domain the MN
immediately SHOULD join the multicast group through the new MAP. Once
multicast group traffic arrives the MN SHOULD send a Binding Update
with zero lifetime to its previous MAP to eliminate its Binding Cache
entry and end packet forwarding.
3.2 Operations of a multicast sender
In a foreign MAP domain a MN initiates multicast-based communication
by sending packets through its MAP using RCoA as its source address.
As receivers are aware of source addresses and as the mobile RCoA
address may change, a Home Address Destination Option MUST be
included (s. section 4.2). By sending this way a multicast routing
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 4]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
tree originating at the MAP will be constructed and local movement
within a MAP domain of the MN remains transparent to multicast
routing.
Sending MCast Traffic to receivers
MAP-Domain1 /------------------------------------>
+-------+
/-----| MAP1 |-----\
|/----+-------+----\|
|| ||
|| ||
|| ||
+-----+ ||
| AR1 | ||
+-----+ ||
|| ||
|| ||
|\-----+-----+ || ||
\------| MN | || ||
+-----+ || ||
|| || Movement
|| ||
MAP-Domain2 || ||
+-----+-----/| \/
/------| MN |------/
|/-----+-----+
||
||
||
+-----+
| AR2 |
+-----+
||
||
||
|\----+-------+
\-----| MAP2 |
+-------+ Sending MCast Traffic to receivers
\------------------------------------>
Figure 1: Intra-MAP-domain Handover for mobile multicast senders
Upon arrival in a new MAP domain the MN submits a Binding Update with
its new LCoA to the previously established multicast-forwarding MAP
and continues its multicast delivery via this previous MAP (s. figure
1). If multicast support is advertised in the new domain the MN
immediately initiates a new multicast routing tree with the new RCoA
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 5]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
as source address through its current MAP. On tree initiation see
section 5.3.3.
The handover procedure finishes after a predefined timeout is
reached: The mobile multicast source continues to deliver data only
via its new MAP and stops forwarding through its previous MAP.
4. Multicast specific supplements
4.1 M-HMIPv6 flag in MAP option message
M-HMIPv6 support is advertised within the MAP option message as used
for router advertisements according to HMIPv6 [5]. For this purpose
an appropriate flag is added in the following way
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 | Dist | Pref |*|*|*|*|M| Res |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Valid Lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ +
| |
+ Global IP Address for MAP +
| |
+ +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Flags:
* Used by HMIPv6
M When set indicates that M-HMIPv6 is supported by
the current MAP
4.2 Use of Home Address option in mobile multicasts
Multicast applications normally are aware of source addresses, which
MUST NOT change during ongoing communication. A mobile multicast
sender therefore MUST include a home address destination option as
defined in [4]. This requirement deviates from MIPv6 multicast
scheme.
4.3 Binding Cache processing
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 6]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
A Correspondent Node receiving multicast packets with Home Address
Option in general need not have a Binding Cache Entry for the home
address included. A CN therefore MUST NOT verify multicast packets
with respect to its Binding Cache.
4.4 Home Agent Multicast Membership control
To provide multicast connectivity to mobile multicast listener away
from home a HA needs to take care of the local multicast group
management. This essentially can be done by either supplying full
multicast routing functionalities at the HA, or by a proxy agent
function.
In the first case it suffices for the HA to observe MNs group
membership at the (tunnel) interface. For a multicast proxy function
a HA must answer MLD queries according to group membership states of
the MN. This is an extension of the specifications in [4].
5. Protocol Details
This section describes M-HMIPv6 operations as are to be performed for
multicast traffic in addition to the MIPv6 and HMIPv6 protocols. Two
perspectives need a general distinction: Multicast handling for a
mobile listener and for a mobile sender.
Mobility Anchor Points as defined in [5] attain the role of multicast
mobility anchor points (M-MAPs) for mobile group members in M-HMIPv6.
All multicast traffic is directed through M-MAPs using RCoA
consistently as identifier with respect to the multicast routing
tree. As MAPs in the unicast case M-MAPs may be viewed as HA proxies
with respect to multicasting.
5.1 Operations of all Mobile Nodes
Being at home the MN may either use its Home Agent or, a possibly
distinct, regional M-MAP as multicast anchor point. Away from home
the MN will learn about regional M-MAPs through router advertisements
(s. section 4.1). A MN SHOULD register with the regional M-MAP having
the highest preference value. If M-HMIPv6 is not supported regionally
the MN first SHOULD attempt to employ a previously established M-MAP
relation, second register with its HA.
M-MAP presence is advertised via router advertisements with MAP
option message as described in section 4.1.
5.2 Mobile multicast listener
Any node on a multicast enabled network may subscribe to multicast
group membership by using its link-local address in MLD membership
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 7]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
reports. In doing so a MN cannot expect to experience a smooth
handover performance while changing from one network to another.
A MN utilizing a HMIPv6 MAP infrastructure can be regarded as eager
for decreased handover delays and therefore SHOULD use the M-HMIPv6
M-MAP functionality for other than link locally scoped multicast
reception.
5.2.1 Operations of the Mobile Node
A mobile multicast listener is registered with its local M-MAP (or
HA), where both communicate via a bi-directional tunnel. The MN
submits its MLD group membership listener report through this tunnel
and answers membership queries of the anchor point.
When a Mobile Node changes its network, it performs a Binding Update
with its previous M-MAP and re-establishes the tunnel at its new
LCoA. Thereby it continues to receive multicast group traffic.
On entering a new M-MAP domain a MN - in addition to the above BU -
registers with the new M-MAP and establishes a bi-directional tunnel.
It immediately sends a MLD listener report through the newly
available connection. Once multicast group traffic arrives from the
new M-MAP, the MN SHOULD submit a BU with zero lifetime to its
previous M-MAP and terminate the corresponding tunnel.
Note that a MN SHOULD preserve a previously established M-MAP
relation until a new multicast forwarding is completely established.
In the case of rapid movement this may lead to a previous multicast
anchor point persisting through several hops.
5.2.2 Operations of the MAP
M-MAP operations for multicast listener support are completely analog
to Home Agent functions as described in [4] and section 4.4. A M-MAP
receiving a HMIPv6 BU from a MN will establish a bi-directional
tunnel. On reception of a tunneled MLD listener report it will
o record multicast group membership in its Binding Cache;
o observe and maintain multicast group membership on its specific
tunnel interface;
o inquire on MNs current group membership as described in
[4];
o forward multicast group traffic to the MN (s. [4] on
multicast packet forwarding).
The M-MAP may control multicast group membership either as a
multicast router or as a multicast proxy agent (s. section 4.4).
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 8]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
5.3 Mobile multicast sender
A multicast source sending with its link-local address is immobile
with respect to multicast application persistence. A mobile multicast
sender MAY tunnel multicast traffic through its HA, using its home
address as source address [4]. Triangular routing and significant
binding update times lead to expected large handover delays, in
general.
A MN utilizing a HMIPv6 MAP infrastructure therefore SHOULD use the
M-HMIPv6 M-MAP functionality for other than link locally scoped
multicast transmissions.
5.3.1 Operations of the Mobile Node
A mobile multicast sender is registered with its local M-MAP, where
both communicate via a bi-directional tunnel. The MN submits
multicast packets through this tunnel with the RCoA as the source
address and the home address included in a home address destination
option as defined in [4].
When a Mobile Node changes its network, it performs a Binding Update
with its previous M-MAP and re-establishes the tunnel at its new
LCoA. Thereby it continues to send its multicast group traffic.
On entering a new M-MAP domain a MN - in addition to the above BU -
registers with the new M-MAP and establishes a bi-directional tunnel.
It immediately starts the tree initialization procedure as defined in
section 5.3.3 for any of its multicast source streams and starts a
timer. As soon as this timer exceeds MAX_MCASTTREEINIT_TIMEOUT the MN
MUST complete the handover by terminating multicast group forwarding
through its previous M-MAP.
A MN, which moves to a new link within the same M-MAP domain before
the timeout is reached, performs a BU with its current M-MAP and
continues the handover procedure without resetting its timers.
A MN, which moves into a new M-MAP domain before the timeout
occurred, continues to forward multicast traffic through its
previously established old M-MAP, discontinues to communicate via its
previously not fully established intermediate M-MAP, resets its timer
and restarts the tree initialization procedure for its current M-MAP.
Thus in case of rapid movement the MN stays bound with its formerly
fully established (or first) M-MAP, serving the last completely
erected multicast routing tree.
5.3.2 Operations of the MAP
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 9]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
M-MAP operations for multicast sender support are completely analog
to MAP functions for unicast support as described in [5].
5.3.3 Tree initialization procedure
In preparation for a seamless handover of a multicast sender a shared
tree needs to be constructed by the routers originating at the new M-
MAP. In general routing trees will be initiated by submitting packets
into the appropriate multicast group. Depending on the routing
protocol this can be a tardy procedure. The tree initialization
procedure provides dedicated instructions for the MN to efficiently
bridge the multicast routing convergence gap.
In performing this procedure the source starts to send every 10
seconds two subsequent packets addressed to the multicast group in
use with the complete IPv6 header but without payload in the first
phase. Subsequence of packets is generated with a random interval
between zero and 30 milliseconds. This first phase ends at the
timeout
MAX( (MAX_MCASTTREEINIT_TIMEOUT - MAX_MCASTTREEFLOW_PERIOD ), 0 ).
Following the first phase the multicast sender submits the complete
multicast traffic for an initialization period of
MAX_MCASTTREEFLOW_PERIOD. The tree initialization procedure ends
after MAX_MCASTTREEINIT_TIMEOUT is reached with continuous submission
of regular traffic.
5.4 Protocol Timer
MAX_MCASTTREEINIT_TIMEOUT 180 seconds (Default)
160 seconds (For DVMRP regimes)
0.5 seconds (For PIM-SM regimes)
MAX_MCASTTREEFLOW_PERIOD 0.1 seconds (Default)
Mobile nodes must allow these variables to be configured by system
management.
6. Security Considerations
This specification uses the concepts of Mobile IPv6 and Hierarchical
Mobile IPv6 mobility management. All security provisions regarding
the relation between the Mobile Node and the Home Agents and between
the Mobile Node and the Mobility Anchor Points apply equally to this
M-HMIPv6 concept.
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 10]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
References
1 Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP
9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
2 Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
3 Hinden, R. and Deering, S. "Internet Protocol Version 6
Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
4 Johnson, D.B., Perkins, C., Arkko, J. "Mobility Support in IPv6",
draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-24 (work in progress), July 2003.
5 Soliman, H., Castelluccia, C., El-Malki, K., Bellier, L.
"Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 mobility management", draft-ietf-
mobileip-hmipv6-08 (work in progress), July 2003.
6 Koodli, R. "Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-mobileip-
fast-mipv6-06 (work in progress), March 2003.
7 Conta, A., Deering, S. "Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6
Specification", RFC 2473, December 1998.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Stefan Zech (FHTW Berlin), Mark
Palkow (DaViKo GmbH) and Hans L. Cycon (FHTW Berlin) for valuable
discussions and a joyful collaboration.
Author's Addresses
Thomas C. Schmidt
FHTW Berlin
Treskowallee 8
Phone: +49-30-5019-2739
Email: Schmidt@fhtw-berlin.de
Matthias Waehlisch
FHTW Berlin
Treskowallee 8
Email: mw@fhtw-berlin.de
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 11]
M-HMIPv6 July 2003
A. A Note on Tunneling
Following the concepts of MIPv6 and HMIPv6 the packet forwarding to
and from the Mobile Node is organized by means of a tunnel section
spanned to a static anchor component such as a MAP or a Home Agent.
Through this technique a MN can hide its movement to CNs or to the
routing infrastructure.
However, keeping in mind real-time data requirements it is highly
desirable to avoid packet encapsulation. Besides the unwanted
overhead, a tunnel may hide QoS information of the original packet
headers and may require load and jitter generating packet
fragmentation, if the tunnel entry point is distinguished from the
sender.
Tunnelling can be avoided by a direct packet forwarding of the static
anchor components. Such forwarding requires a change of packet's
source or destination address at the forwarder, which usually
conflicts with checksums covering IPv6 pseudo headers. In M-MIPv6
multicast communication from a Mobile Node though carries a MIPv6
extension header, the home address destination option header. This
header denotes an alternate source address which enters the pseudo
header instead of the original IPv6 header address.
Multicast packets sent from the MN therefore could be forwarded by
the MAP to the network by replacing source addresses without
recalculation of header checksums. Employing such direct packet
forwarding would allow a MN to distribute multicast streams without a
tunnel.
Schmidt, Waehlisch Expires - January 2004 [Page 12]