Internet DRAFT - draft-jeong-netlmm-dual-stack-moving-ps

draft-jeong-netlmm-dual-stack-moving-ps






Network Working Group                                           S. Jeong
Internet-Draft                                                      ETRI
Intended status: Informational                                  Y-H. Han
Expires: March 1, 2007                                               KUT
                                                               M-K. Shin
                                                                    ETRI
                                                               P. Savola
                                                               CSC/FUNET
                                                         August 28, 2006


        Problem Statement for Dual Stack Moving Internet (DSMI)
             draft-jeong-netlmm-dual-stack-moving-ps-00.txt

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 March 1, 2007.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).









Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


Abstract

   This draft discusses the handover problem of dual stack mobile nodes
   when the mobile nodes roam over IPv4 and IPv6 NETLMM domains.
   Current NETLMM architecture supports IPv6 only.  However, as the
   NETLMM architecture being more widely used, it will be likely to
   introduce the NETLMM architecture to IPv4 networks.  In this
   environment, a dual stack mobile node may move to both IPv6 and IPv4
   NETLMM domains.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Problem Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.1.  Handover Scenario for Dual Stack Mobile Nodes  . . . . . .  5
   4.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 11





























Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


1.  Introduction

   The Internet is now evolving towards a commercial carrier-grade IP
   network with appropriate QoS and security.  Mobility management is
   one of the important factors in realizing such a mature IP network.
   Many proposals on IP mobility management for the Internet have
   considered the use of end-to-end principles.  However, it is well
   known that mobility for IP nodes can be more efficiently supported if
   mobility management is handled by network elements.

   The IETF NETLMM WG has launched standardization of network-based
   mobility management in a localized domain.  According to
   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-ps], problems of the existing host-based
   solutions for localized mobility management are summarized as follow:
   1) change of host stack software, 2) lack of supporting both IPv4 and
   IPv6, and 3) additional security associations between network nodes
   and mobile nodes.  Network-based localized mobility management could
   be one of the prominent ways to support IP mobility to mobile nodes,
   because it requires no software on the mobile node.

   In [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-req], 12 goals for localized mobility
   management are described.  Among them, following goal is not achieved
   yet.

   o  Support for IPv4 and IPv6 (Goal #9)

   During the transition period from IPv4 to IPv6, it will be likely to
   exist heterogeneous localized domains supporting different IP stacks.
   That is, it is expected that some localized domains deploy IPv4-only,
   while other domains supports IPv6-only.  In this environment, a dual
   stack mobile node may move to both IPv6 NETLMM domains and IPv4
   NETLMM domains.  Therefore, a new mobility management protocol is
   required to maintain IP connectivity during a dual stack mobile
   node's handover between IPv6 NETLMM domains and IPv4 NETLMM domains.

















Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


2.  Terminology

   Terminology in this document follows that in [RFC3753] and
   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-ps], with the addition of some new and
   revised terminology given here:

   o  Mobility Anchor Point (MAP) : A node in the network which manages
      a mapping between mobile node's permanent address and the local
      temporary address.










































Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


3.  Problem Statement

   Current network-based localized mobility management architecture
   proposed by NETLMM WG supports IPv6 only.  However, as the NETLMM
   architecture being more widely used, it will be likely to introduce
   the NETLMM architecture to IPv4 networks.

   In this environment, a dual stack mobile node may move to not only
   IPv6 NETLMM domains but also IPv4 NETLMM domains.  When the dual
   stack mobile node handovers between IPv6 NETLMM and IPv4 NETLMM
   domains, it will be difficult to maintain IP connectivity.
   Especially, maintaining IPv6 connectivity in IPv4 NETLMM domains or
   IPv4 connectivity in IPv6 NETLMM domains is not supported.
   Therefore, this suggests to design a mobility management solution for
   federated NETLMM domains.

   Current mobility management protocols (e.g., Mobile IP) may be
   applied to the mobility management between heterogeneous NETLMM
   domains.  However, the mobile host-side stack requirement would
   hinders the wide deployment of those mobility management protocols.
   Also, location privacy problem may occur when the mobile node moves
   to other NETLMM domains.  The change in temporary local address as
   the mobile node moves exposes the mobile node's topological location
   to correspondents and potentially to eavesdroppers
   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-ps].

   Therefore, it is needed to develop a mobility management protocol
   that supports mobile node's roaming over IPv6 and IPv4 NETLMM domains
   with single IP address and does not require additional host-side
   software update.

3.1.  Handover Scenario for Dual Stack Mobile Nodes

   The mobile node's movement scenario for federated NETLMM domains is
   shown in Fig. 1.  In the following handover scenario, we assume that
   both the mobile nodes and the MAPs are IPv4 and IPv6-capable and that
   the proposed protocol solution of NETLMM WG is used within a NETLMM
   domain.  We also assume that the MAPs are always reachable through a
   globally unique IPv4 or IPv6 address.

   In the handover scenario, the dual stack mobile node moves between an
   IPv6-only NETLMM domain and IPv4-only NETLMM domain.









Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


                               /-----------\
                              /   Internet  \
                              \             /
                               \-----+-----/
                                     |
                       +-------------+-------------+
                       |                           |
                    +-------+                  +-------+
                    |  MAP  |                  |  MAP  |
                    +---+---+                  +-------+
                        |                           |
                 /------+------\             /------+------\
                /    NETLMM     \           /    NETLMM     \
                \  domain (v4)  /           \   domain(v6)  /
                 \-------------/             \-------------/
                   |          |                |          |
                +--+--+    +--+--+          +--+--+    +--+--+
                | AR1 |    | AR2 |          | AR3 |    | AR4 |
                +-----+    +-----+          +-----+    +-----+
                  / \        / \              / \        / \
                 /   \      /   \            /   \      /   \
                               +----+      +----+
                               | MN | <--> | MN |
                               +----+      +----+
                                    movement

     Figure 1: Handover between NETLMM domains supporting different IP
                                 versions

   In the scenario, the mobile node moves between the IPv6-only NETLMM
   domain and IPv4-only NETLMM domain, but the mobile node might be
   communicating with an IPv4-only application as well as an IPv6
   application.  Thus, we consider the following two cases of
   applications for CN.

   o  case 1 : CN (Use of IPv4-only applications)

   o  case 2 : CN (Use of IPv6 applications)













Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


4.  IANA Considerations

   There is no IANA consideration in this document.
















































Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


5.  Security Considerations

   Although NETLMM protocol solution supports mobility without any extra
   signaling between a mobile node and network, it still requires
   mobility signaling for the handover between NETLMM domains.  Thus, it
   is required to have extra security association between a MAP and a
   mobile node when handover between NETLMM domains occurs.  Also,
   removing mobile node's involvement in mobility management limits the
   possibility of DoS attacks on network infrastructural elements
   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-req].  IPSec can be applied to guarantee the
   signaling messages exchanged by network entities.








































Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


6.  References

   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-ps]
              Kempf, J., "Problem Statement for Network-based Localized
              Mobility Management", draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-ps-04 (work
              in progress), June 2006.

   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-nohost-req]
              Kempf, J., "Goals for Network-based Localized Mobility
              Management (NETLMM)", draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-req-04
              (work in progress), August 2006.

   [RFC3753]  Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology",
              RFC 3753, June 2004.





































Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


Authors' Addresses

   Sangjin Jeong
   ETRI
   161 Gajeong-dong, Yusung-gu
   Daejeon, 305-350
   Korea

   Phone: +82 42 860 1877
   Email: sjjeong@gmail.com


   Youn-Hee Han
   KUT
   Gajeon-Ri 307 Byeongcheon-Myeon
   Cheonan-Si Chungnam Province, 330-708
   Korea

   Email: yhhan@kut.ac.kr


   Myung-Ki Shin
   ETRI
   161 Gajeong-dong, Yusung-gu
   Daejeon, 305-350
   Korea

   Phone: +82 42 860 4847
   Email: myungki.shin@gmail.com


   Pekka Savola
   CSC/FUNET
   Espoo
   Finland

   Email: psavola@funet.fi














Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft          Dual Stack Moving Problem            August 2006


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

   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 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).





Jeong, et al.             Expires March 1, 2007                [Page 11]